Classical Sonata Analysis

Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/06/1207:28 PM

We are starting afresh with our efforts in analysis by digging into pieces that less experienced pianists are more likely to be able to play and which provide ample opportunities to develop analytical skills.

We will start with Clementi's Sonatina Op. 36 No. 1 in C major, first movement.It should be known to many pianists.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/07/1201:18 AM

Interesting, I first played this 22 years ago.. my introduction to Clementi and really among the first classical music pieces I ever played. I can't hear the audio on the computer I'm on right now (on the road), but I'll check it out when I get back next week. I may follow along on this one. Good choice.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/07/1209:10 AM

The sonatina is like a simple version of the sonata. Both have three movements, usually with the middle movement slow and the others fast such as allegro.

In sonata-allegro form (I've seen it written as "sonata form"), the piece has three sections:1. Exposition: Two or more themes or subjects are set out, one after the other, with the second one in a new key. Sometimes there will be a passage bridging the subjects, and the section can be prolonged at the end.2. Development: This is where the composer gets creative. He may take part of the original subject and play with it, going to different keys.3. Recapitulation: The composer goes back to the subjects we saw in the Exposition. This time the second subject will stay in the original key.

A sonatina is much simpler version of a sonata. In the first Allegro movement, the music up to the repeat sets up the subjects in the two keys. In the second half, there is a short development. Then we see the same subjects that we had before in the Exposition. The first is an octave below the original, and Clementi does a mirror image of some of the notes. The second movement stays in the tonic key.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/07/1209:22 AM

Let's run through some of the things we can do at the start of our analysis.

Look at:1. The composer. This will give a very rough guide to date and style. The more you know about the principal composers of the period the more information you can glean just from the name.

Clementi is considered the father of modern piano playing. He was the first composer to make use of the dynamic properties of the new instrument and the new action. He competed with Mozart for piano-playing honours (and gained far more from it than Mozart ever did). His compositions evoked the admiration of Beethoven (for whom he became the English publisher) and Brahms. He is famed for his ability to play thirds, and you'll come across some in this sonatina.

He is probably most famous for his Gradus ad Parnassum (Steps to Parnassus), a collection of 100 exercises to develop pianoforte technique. Though they are less favoured now than they have been they are, like Chopin's etudes, full of musical value as well as pedagogical value. They are not, though, for beginners.

His six progressive sonatinas, of which we are studying the first, are still standard fare in piano pedagogy. They have much musical interest and provide would-be pianists with first class opportunities for a fine, well-rounded technique.

2. The title. This may give an initial indication to the form or genre and (coupled with the composer) an indication of what to expect. A sonatina in Clementi's hand is a sonata on a small scale.

As has been mentioned in our travels, the architectural forms developed before 1600 were musically satisfying. They are the backbone of contemporary songs today. But with the development of equal temperament and tonality there emerged out of the otherwise simple binary form a more versatile method of providing structure, namely key.

After the height of the baroque period (around 1720) and the deaths of Bach, Handel and Scarlatti there was a lull in musical creativity (in terms of great composers). Most of the new music was provided by the sons of Bach, predominantly CPE and JC Bach and revolved around the Galant style, the storm and stress movement building up in literature and the sentimental Empfindsamer style. These styles merged towards the end of the century (around 1770) and two huge figures rose to lead the way in the development of the classical sonata and symphony, Haydn and Mozart.

3. The music. Key, tempo, metre, texture, colour (amount of accidentals), dynamics, rhythmic diversity, scale and complexity can all be had from a fairly quick perusal of the score.

Repeat bars are an easy to spot indicator of sections though not always exactly at the section end. Rests in both hands can sometimes indicate the same thing. Plain double bar lines usually indicate a division between sections.

4. After reading or playing through and listening, hearing or imagining (or audiating as Edwin Gordon describes it) the music we should have a better idea of what's going on and we can begin to define sections, pick out principal cadences and thematic material and gradually allow the form and structure to emerge.

5. After a good overview we could begin a key scheme diagram and/or harmonic analysis.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/07/1209:23 AM

Your numbering efforts are greatly appreciated, Greener. I think (?) usually every movement starts with a number 1 since they can also be played as separate pieces. For me personally a number is a number but the group may feel different, and maybe we should be correct about it.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/07/1210:08 AM

3. Key, tempo, metre, texture, colour (amount of accidentals), dynamics, rhythmic diversity, scale and complexity can all be had from a fairly quick perusal of the score.

key, tempo, and meter are clear

What is texture?

What is colour? Going by the clue "amount of accidentals" I imagine it might mean how often it changes keys by modulation? In which case accidentals used for things like neighbour tones would not count.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/07/1210:09 AM

Originally Posted By: keystring

Your numbering efforts are greatly appreciated, Greener. I think (?) usually every movement starts with a number 1 since they can also be played as separate pieces. For me personally a number is a number but the group may feel different, and maybe we should be correct about it.

I have numbered my score like Jeff has done. How should it be numbered?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/07/1210:12 AM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

4. After reading or playing through and listening, hearing or imagining (or audiating as Edwin Gordon describes it) the music we should have a better idea of what's going on and we can begin to define sections, pick out principal cadences and thematic material and gradually allow the form and structure to emerge.

Just listening for now to 1st movement:

2 Major key cadences in first A. Not sure yet, what they are, but sounds like 2. And, it sounds all major.

Section B, starts out what sounds like minor. Again, have not identified for sure with score and key, but sounds minor to me with shift to major at m24.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/07/1210:16 AM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/07/1210:22 AM

Originally Posted By: HeirborneGroupie

Originally Posted By: keystring

Your numbering efforts are greatly appreciated, Greener. I think (?) usually every movement starts with a number 1 since they can also be played as separate pieces. For me personally a number is a number but the group may feel different, and maybe we should be correct about it.

I have numbered my score like Jeff has done. How should it be numbered?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/07/1210:43 AM

3. Key, tempo, metre, texture, colour (amount of accidentals), dynamics, rhythmic diversity, scale and complexity can all be had from a fairly quick perusal of the score.

key, tempo, and meter are clear

What is texture?

What is colour? Going by the clue "amount of accidentals" I imagine it might mean how often it changes keys by modulation? In which case accidentals used for things like neighbour tones would not count.

Colour (color): Yes, it may indicate either a change of key or just, er, colour!

In this piece the accidentals are most likely to indicate key change. In Liszt's Grand Galop Chromatique it may just be because he used the wrong key signature

Texture: Music may be categorised as monophonic (one voice like a solo flute piece), polyphonic (many voices like a fugue), homophonic (melody and accompaniment like a Chopin Nocturne or the E minor prelude) etc.

It may also be considered from the view point of lush or sparse, i.e. the number of notes in chords. Compare this sonatina, for example, with Mozart's Sonata in A minor, K310.

Dynamics: In this work there are no extremes. From Piano to Forte is as far as we need to go.

Rhythmic diversity: the rhythm here is more diverse than the reams of quavers or semiquavers typical of the non-sustaining baroque instruments but there are mostly only crotchets and quavers (quarter and eighth notes).

Scale is small as you'd expect of a sonatina and complexity is, er, rather limited. Mostly only rhythmically simple right hand over mostly single bass notes.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/07/1211:06 AM

2 Major key cadences in first A. Not sure yet, what they are, but sounds like 2. And, it sounds all major.

Section B, starts out what sounds like minor. Again, have not identified for sure with score and key, but sounds minor to me with shift to major at m24.

I shall go back and verify now.

Oh, my goodness, my gracious! We're at it again with the cross-postings!

Good job with the renumbering, Jeff.

As to the analysis, section A is up to the first repeat bar and B is from it.

In a sonata/sonatina we refer to the first "half" (up to the repeat bar) as the 'exposition' where the composer lays out his principal ideas, one idea or set of ideas in the tonic key and another typically contrasting set in the dominant key. It is not so much the contrast in themes (Mozart used greater contrasts than did Haydn) but there IS contrast between the keys. This provides drama which was newly emerging in music after the Baroque period.

The second half begins with the 'development' where he takes those ideas and weaves his magic with them exploring different keys, variations, juxtapositions etc, and finally, the 'recapitulation' where the composer reminds us of the initial material first heard in tonic and dominant by repeating it but this time it may be slightly altered with regard to what happened in the development, perhaps, and it will all be in the tonic key.

So basically it's the presentation, development and resolution of conflict. The story is told not by the architectural means of verses and choruses or section A's and section B's but by the interplay of themes and ideas in different keys.

Yes, stick with the first movement for now.

Yes, the development begins in minor and the recapitulation begins at M24 in major.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/07/1211:49 AM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/07/1212:08 PM

Originally Posted By: HeirborneGroupie

OK, so each movement has an exposition, development and recapitulation?

Any of (or only) the movements in sonata form will have an exposition (up to the repeat bars), a development (from the repeat bars) and a recapitulation where at least the material you first heard in the dominant will be played again in the tonic. Usually both ideas are repeated in the recapitulation.

The other movements in this sonatina are not themselves in sonata form, just in a sonata.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/07/1212:50 PM

I see the change with incidentals starting at 6. But, when listening, it sounds to me like the new idea doesn't really happen until m9, and already in new key.

dunno, but that was my reasoning

That's excellent, Jeff.

The figure in M1, I will call the bugle call. It recurs in M2. In M3 we have a new figure, a four-note descending sequence. Where else do you see the bugle call and where else a four-note descending sequence?

In M8 there's a new figure, a rising sequence of 8 notes followed by a fourth figure, an octave leap to three crotchets/quarter notes.

If you take those figures out of the score what are left with? Are there any more patterns up to the repeat bars?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/07/1201:01 PM

I would call mm.1-4 the first theme, in C major. Mm.5-8 are a transition, starting in C major and ending in G major. The transition is to the second theme in mm.9-15, which is in G major.

Part of my choice to identify mm.5-8 as a transition is based on looking at how this material reappears at the end of the movement.

I'm looking for where measures 5-8 reappear at the end but I'm not seeing it. Could you point out where exactly this happens?

They don't reappear, that's my point. Mm.16-23 could be called Development. Mm.1-4 reappear, an octave lower, in mm.24-27, both in C major. Mm.9-15 reappear (with the different notes, but the same harmonies relative to the key) of the last 3 measures altered, but now in C major instead of G major, at mm.32-38. The four measures mm.5-8 had to bridge from C to G; the four mm. 28-31 are altered in order to bridge from C to C.

I'm probably throwing out a lot of ideas which haven't been developed step-by-step yet. And I'm not sure that mine is a particularly good way of thinking about this; I just have "altered transitions" on my mind from a tangent that came up on a previous thread.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/07/1201:19 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

If you take those figures out of the score what are left with? Are there any more patterns up to the repeat bars?

That just about accounts for everything, m7 and first half of m13 though are a little different from the descending eight notes in 3,4,12,13,14, in that there is a more gentle stepping down. Then, the only one left is m15 where we have 4 note ascend.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/07/1202:08 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/07/1203:04 PM

I would call mm.1-4 the first theme, in C major. Mm.5-8 are a transition, starting in C major and ending in G major. The transition is to the second theme in mm.9-15, which is in G major.

Part of my choice to identify mm.5-8 as a transition is based on looking at how this material reappears at the end of the movement.

I agree with M1-4 being the first theme. I think M5-6 are beginning to repeat it and M7 is a surprise, the bridge passage to G major. Jeff heard M9 as established in G major and I still do but M8 is actually a G major scale with G in the bass! Cold logic says it can't be anything other than G. So now I think M8-11 are the second subject and M12-M15 are a codetta. Those last four measures have a codetta feel about them.

Some terminology. When a figure or theme is spread vertically over a larger compass it is said to be an expansion. I suppose M16 is a slight compression of the first figure. M19 is a decoration of it (the addition of subsidiary notes).

M18 seems to be a new idea and has spawned the bass in M20-21. I can't see where else it might have come from. I thought it might be from the quaver pairs from M16 & M17. Any ideas?

M22 is the decorated pattern from M19 with our four note decending sequence.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/07/1205:04 PM

M18 seems to be a new idea and has spawned the bass in M20-21. I can't see where else it might have come from. I thought it might be from the quaver pairs from M16 & M17. Any ideas?

Does that leave any measures unaccounted for?

Could it be coming from 7 start of 8? Otherwise, M20-21 seem to be the only standalone ones?

Yes, it could indeed._______________________

So we've had a look at this little work and see that it has contrast in key and subject matter yet it is all developed from a handful of germs.

Listen again to the recurrence of these little seeds that give this piece its unity, its sameness, as you play it or listen to it. They will register more clearly and sound will start to become or a more useful tool in your later analyses. It's easier to recognise a motif or theme slowed down than it is to see a group of quavers changed into crotchets. You might even recognise some of them in the next two movements.

The key scheme, since no-one has published it, is:||: C major : G major : |||: C minor : C major :||

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/07/1205:54 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

The other movements in this sonatina are not themselves in sonata form, just in a sonata.

My book explaining sonatas and sonatinas says that the movements are either in sonata-allegro form, or rondo form. I have found this book to be incomplete in other areas so I don't trust this information. Is it trustworthy?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/07/1206:23 PM

I would call mm.1-4 the first theme, in C major. Mm.5-8 are a transition, starting in C major and ending in G major. The transition is to the second theme in mm.9-15, which is in G major.

Part of my choice to identify mm.5-8 as a transition is based on looking at how this material reappears at the end of the movement.

I was of two minds about this before reading this, and I think it can be seen in more than one way. When I play it I'm more tuned to the melody because I learned the piece a long time ago when I thought like a singer. Mm. 1-4 sets up a phrase, and then m. 5 sounds like it's going to answer that phrase, and starts off the same way but the slips into the D chord at the end of m. 6 and by 7 & 8 it sidesteps completing the phrase, and instead moves the music into G major. Suddenly m. 8, instead of concluding the 2nd phrase, launches a new theme in G major with the ascending scale in both m. 8 and 10. It's like a sleight of hand. mm. 6 & 7 also have this transition that you mention.

This first theme is taken up in m. 24 (everyone's in agreement with that). Mm. 24 - 28 are exactly the same as 1 - 4. The next four measures can't modulate to G again since in sonata-allegro form the second theme has to stay in the tonic. So the next four measures are different. Again I'm in a quandary whether to see the four measures as one unit, or whether to see a transition (or in this case - non-transition, since it stays in the same key). Again, I see both.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/07/1207:18 PM

Originally Posted By: keystring

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

The other movements in this sonatina are not themselves in sonata form, just in a sonata.

My book explaining sonatas and sonatinas says that the movements are either in sonata-allegro form, or rondo form. I have found this book to be incomplete in other areas so I don't trust this information. Is it trustworthy?

It would be typical that the second movement in a Haydn sonata is a Minuet (or an Adagio followed by a Minuet) and a brisk Allegro to finish. Beethoven changed all that, of course, by bringing in the Scherzo.

Mozart would prefer a slow movement to a minuet follwed by a Rondo - note that the Rondo Alla Turca is not a rondo - or an Allegro/Presto.

In their symphonies they both settled often on sonata form for the first movement, a slow movement, a minuet, and a fast movement.

Originally Posted By: keystring

Again I'm in a quandary whether to see the four measures as one unit, or whether to see a transition (or in this case - non-transition, since it stays in the same key). Again, I see both.

What you see is what is there.

Jackson Pollock didn't paint anything specific, just a balance of colour, tone and texture however much of the picture you saw or extracted. If you can see the face of the Messiah in it, then it's there.

The composer's work is finished when the publisher releases it. If critics put names on Chopin's Preludes or Beethoven's "Moonlight" then that is what they are. It's in the eye of the beholder, the beauty, the pattern and the structure.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/07/1207:25 PM

I know we cut short our look at binary form but I'd like to point out the difference between the classical sonata and the baroque binary.

In the Baroque scheme only the cadences matched at the end in most of the works. The 'rhyming' feature we saw in the Bach Prelude No. 4 was a precursor of the classical form. In the classical sonata all the material heard in the first half in the dominant key is repeated in the second half in tonic. The first 'subject' in tonic was occasionally omitted or altered in the recapitulation.

The two reasons for the change are that as the development section got longer and travelled to more distant keys more of the first half had to be repeated to remind the listener of the material and secondly in the first half the conflict of the keys was set up and in the recapitulation it is resolved. The story comes to a satisfactory conclusion.

We have seen how important it is to recognise the little fragments and figures that occupy the exposition and why it is important to observe the repeat. If the material is only heard once, the fragments may not be recognised in the development section and much of the story will be lost.______________________________

We are looking at classical sonata form and the next two movement are not in sonata form. I don't know how interested you'll be in looking at these. It might make a nice personal project but I'll start you off.

Look again at the octave figure in M9 and the three upper notes.

Recall again how in the Chopin Prelude the melody notes descended from B to F# but skirted the G.

Now look at the first note in each of the first four bars of the Andante. C-A-F-A and imagine that they're trying to be C-A-A-A. See how three notes figure at the end of M4 and M5, the first notes of M5-8 = D-C-C-C.The pedal notes in M7 are C-C-C. Look at M9 and M11, M13, the pedal D in M14 etc. These things may not be there by design but it gives unity to the work and noticing makes it easier to enjoy listening and to memorise the piece.

As far as form goes, this is a loose ternary form. M1-12 being A, M13-18 being B and M19 -26 being an abbreviated A.

Turning to the Vivace, recall again the first figure in the Allegro and drop the first note. You're left with the falling quavers and two knocks. Now look at the opening figure in the Vivace and its abbreviated form in M4.See how much use is made of that throughout the piece. I particularly enjoy the falling knock spread over M31-33.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/08/1207:15 AM

Tbh, when I look at binary form, I do not think primarily in terms of cadences, though they play a role. What I see in "baroque binary" are for example (rounded binary):

A A // B A' B A' //

ternary

A / B / A

etc.

What I see in this sonatina is

A B // [development] A' B' ]

I can't disagree with your interpretation of A and B. They're not fixed things. Music is such a temporal abstract thing. There's no dictionary definition of what A is and what B is. Let me try and define my terms.

(I hope I didn't overrate the cadence in binary; all I meant was that each half finished on V-I. )

What I see in binary is double repeat bars in the middle of the piece.

Part A is up to the double repeat bars and Part B is from there to the end so, for me, Binary is:

||: A :|||: B :|| (two parts each repeated)

or, as heard

A A | B B

'A' consists of material in tonic, a, and material in dominant, b. The second half is material in varying keys ending in tonic. Since baroque binary form was not about drama and conflict but each piece having a single 'affekt', mood, emotion, etc. none of the material making up a or b needed to be repeated at the end. So the development section is c and the final tonic section is d. So now I hear a baroque binary piece as:

a b a b | c d c d

It was Bach and Scarlatti making 'rhymes', where the material in dominant at the end of the first half appeared in tonic at the end of the second half, that I believe led the way to the classical sonata. So now I see the classical sonata as:

||: A :|||: B :|| (just like binary)

or as heard

A A B B (just like binary)

but inside I now hear second subject material(*) so I get

a b a b | c a' b' c a' b' (different from binary)

(*) Haydn predominantly used a continuation of the first subject material rather than a contrasting subject as Mozart and Beethoven did. For Haydn, and Clementi in this little piece, the first and and second subjects are not really in contrast; the latter is more a continuation of the former and is not really a true 'second subject'.

How we hear the works is personal, the aural equivalent of cloud watching. This is why I keep harping on about the importance of key. It's tonal music. The structure comes from the key, not from the layout of the score.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/08/1208:41 AM

Just back to Allegro, momentarily;

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

The key scheme, since no-one has published it, is:||: C major : G major : |||: C minor : C major :||

Not sure how important, but just for my records. Are we indicating a switch to C major at m24? This is where I notice/hear the section split, but see naturals in previous measure (similar to how we changed preference to earlier measure in first half.)

If I were writing in all the sections for the second half "a b a b | c a' b' c a' b' (different from binary)."

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/08/1209:59 AM

Originally Posted By: Greener

Just back to Allegro, momentarily; ...c m16a m24b m32repeat

is this correct ?

M16-23 is definitely the development section. I think we're all agreed on that.

I'm confident that M1-4 is the first theme and M5-6 are more than a suggestion of repeating it. Whether M5 or M7 starts the bridge passage is up to your own feeling on the matter. Either case could be argued.

Whether M8 is the end of the bridge passage or, as it is like M10, is part of it, is dependent on what YOU hear. When I look at the score M8 is part of the second subject, when I play it and hear it, it only LEADS to the second subject. I'm indifferent about it and changeable.

I'm confident we've established G major by M9.

Classicism is about proportion. Do you know of the Golden Section? The ratio of a+b to a = the ratio of a to b? The ratio of the first subject to second is the same as the ratio of the recap'n to the whole movement etc.

Music is heard but the score is a physical thing. Going by the score alone:-

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/08/1210:58 AM

Music is heard but the score is a physical thing. Going by the score alone:-

IF a = M1-6.75 and b = M6.75-M11 and M12-M15 = closing theme

THEN a:b = 6.75:4.25 = 0.614 (GS = 0.618) and B:A = 23:15 = 0.605

Given the length of the piece those numbers very proportional.

Thanks. That's pretty much what I was thinking too, so just verifies everything for me

Although may need to come back and think on it a little more.

Moving right along ... I see we are in 3/4 time in 2nd movement. I take it this is a Waltz? ... teasing. I had a listen and there is no way I am dancing to this.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

We are looking at classical sonata form and the next two movement are not in sonata form. I don't know how interested you'll be in looking at these. It might make a nice personal project but I'll start you off.

Look again at the octave figure in M9 and the three upper notes.

Recall again how in the Chopin Prelude the melody notes descended from B to F# but skirted the G.

Now look at the first note in each of the first four bars of the Andante. C-A-F-A and imagine that they're trying to be C-A-A-A. See how three notes figure at the end of M4 and M5, the first notes of M5-8 = D-C-C-C.The pedal notes in M7 are C-C-C. Look at M9 and M11, M13, the pedal D in M14 etc. These things may not be there by design but it gives unity to the work and noticing makes it easier to enjoy listening and to memorise the piece.

As far as form goes, this is a loose ternary form. M1-12 being A, M13-18 being B and M19 -26 being an abbreviated A.

For further analysis, should I still be looking for and identifying various ideas within the sections and see how identified themes are propagated throughout?

In some sections it might be worth looking at a harmonic analysis but in tonal music that's not as important as key. It's more useful for The Beatles. I only usually look at the harmony in cadences or 'interesting spots'. Of course, I do a lot by ear and sight singing; even when reading Symphonies in the miniature score series I can imagine the whole orchestra.

I look for devices; figures, themes, and motifs that recur in various guises, speeded up, slowed down, inverted, backwards, etc.

I try to break it into sections, look at the proportions of the various parts, contrasts between sections, tension and release, unity and so on.

How does it differ from most pieces in that style/genre/form/key etc.

I'm not a great reader but I work through an orchestral score one hand at a time because I can get chromatic intervals wrong when I sight-sing and I struggle with the trumpets and clarinets (in B-flat and sometimes E-flat) though I'm OK with the viola part (and clef) in LH and the violin part in RH (they're mostly only one or two notes at a time).

I listen closely to professional performances for anything I might have missed._____________________________

If you want to look closely at the two other movments it'll be good practise for you and move you further from the 'Is this correct?' situation and closer to the 'O, I see that differently!' position.

Typically the composers put more into the movements in sonata form so there SHOULD be more to find and that's where I'd like to concentrate most of the energy but if you want to do the other movements and discuss your findings or your findings prompt discussion from the others then let's go there.

When you're seeing things I've missed - we're making real progress here and profiting enormously from the group analysis approach. Imagine how good you'll feel when you're telling me how a movement works!

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/08/1201:55 PM

We got so far so quickly on the last one I'd be happy to do them all in order or alternately with similar material.

I wouldn't mind pairing this one with Haydn's Hob.XVI/8 divertimento in G major. This is an easy sonata to play. The final allegro sounds very impressive but falls easily under the fingers. It's quite likey that Haydn wrote this as a teaching piece. It's not entirely certain whether it was to teach the instrument or composition. It's excellent material for our analysis.

Have a quick look/play through at the Clementi sonatina no. 2 (also in G major) and do the same with this one and see which you prefer.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/08/1205:16 PM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Richard, that was a very helpful post for me.

Do you mean finally finding out how I work? ___________________________

So we're looking at the Haydn, then.

Listen a few times or play it if you can. It's a beginners piece, about grade 2 (ABRSM) so go slow and you should do a reasonable job at least for finding out what's happening even if you have to do RH alone. You will probably get more than listening to an up to tempo professional recording but you should do that too, of course, as many of them as you can find.

We've already seen first and second subjects in the Clementi so mark your score in pencil where you think you hear them here.

Divide it into sections, look at the proportions of the various parts, contrasts between sections, tension and release, unity and so on.

How does it differ from the Clementi Sonatina? How is it the same?__________________________

The piece was written by Pappa Haydn in about 1760 as one of a set of six easy pieces. He called them Divertimenti (amusements).

Haydn was the worlds first great international musical celebrity. He, more than anyone else, shaped what we know as the symphony, the sonata, the string quartet, and the concerto and while his nature wasn't given to shaking up the world as Mozart and Beethoven were he was the first to show signs of the forthcoming Romantic age.

He was a very personable character, always of good cheer and never one for extremes. His music is full of charm, wit, humour and surprise. While Bach wrote for God and Mozart wrote like one, Haydn wrote for humanity. He was the most prolific of the great composers.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/09/1208:52 AM

Franz Joseph Haydn (he used his second name spelled in German ... Josef)

1732-1809; Born in Rohrau Austria of hungarian descent and raised in a musical family.

Considered "Father of the Symphony" and "Father of the String Quartet"

The more I learn and understand about this man, the more I like him. Aside from the 227 year age difference we were practically twins. Of course he got all the talent. Thankfully though, I got all the good looks .

According to some estimates Josef produced some 340 hour of music. More then Bach, Handel, Mozart or Beethoven.

He was influenced by Johann Stamitz, Giovanni Battista Sammartini. Among his followers were Mendelssohn, Schubert, Beethoven, Mozart.

First movement -- of four movements -- score analyis; Sonata in G Major (composed 1766) to follow ...

Above is quick preliminary review to further set the stage of this great composer.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/09/1210:12 AM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/09/1210:26 AM

Greener, part A lays out all of the themes for the first time, so it is all Exposition Part B, after the repeat, contains the Development (wandering around) and the Recapitulation (very similar to the Exposition).

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/09/1210:37 AM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/09/1210:38 AM

Yes, PianoStudent88 has the terminology but you have the content.

The exposition is up to the repeat bars in M16 3/4. It has three themes, which you've found easily, the first is M1 to M8 1/2 in G closing with an imperfect cadence (IV-V) and the second in D major closes with a perfect (V-I) cadence at M14 1/4. The last 2 1/2 measures are a closing theme.

The development is M16 3/4 up to M26 3/4.

The Recapitulation is from M26 3/4 to the end in G throughout.

Excellent progress, Jeff. I may have to start watching my back sooner than you thought!

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/09/1211:20 AM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/09/1211:39 AM

Look at the themes in the exposition. How do they compare and contrast?

Explore the keys and material in the development section. Find out where all the material comes from. It should be a composite of the fragments, figures and themes from the exposition. Just like the Clementi sonatina.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/09/1204:21 PM

Lead in to m17 = Lead in to m1 Off beat melody in m17 is from theme 2 that starts in 8.5

This next section I will need to think more on. I think m18-m19 may be condensed version of m5-m7.

end of m21 is first (lead) theme again, we also hear this at end of m19 and again at end of m22.

Need to come back to this section. Page is getting very messy, so need to transcribe first.

"Lead in to m17 = Lead in to m1" : Yes

"Off beat melody in m17 is from theme 2 that starts in 8.5" : beats me. I can't see where RH comes from.

"This next section I will need to think more on. I think m18-m19 may be condensed version of m5-m7." : No, but nice try. Any more thoughts?

"end of m21 is first (lead) theme again, we also hear this at end of m19 and again at end of m22." : I know you meant M23 not M22 and yes, the three note figure introduces each of the four phrase in the development.

"Need to come back to this section. Page is getting very messy, so need to transcribe first. " : Any more progress?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/09/1205:02 PM

For connecting themes: This might work for someone who relates to music like I do. I caught on to it for the sonatinas when I was young before having theory. I hear the melody line (play it, hear it). So if a melody as part of A or B repeats itself later on in the recapitulation, then I hear it and think "Oh, there's that melody again. Seems to be an octave lower / different key." When the composer plays with it by sticking in new notes, or starting differently but landing at the same time, then the "ear player" in me hears a written down improvisation. I'm mentioning this because I read that Greener started as an ear person. Since I was primarily a singer, I tend to hear melody more, and I'm trying to catch up to hearing chords.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/09/1205:15 PM

Hi KS, yes thanks and agree. This is obvious for most of the B section in relating back to the A section. But, not so obvious for the first two lines (with exception of a couple of sporadic mentions of the first theme melody thrown in.) In this case, I'm not hearing a very good match. But, will keep trying

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/09/1205:34 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/09/1206:03 PM

This can be tiring, Jeff, but you've done well.

Some of this might be difficult to hear until you're more familiar with what it is that you're listening for so I'll fill this out for you here and you can try and find these figures in the other three movements. Did you see and go over the connections I posted for the other movements in the Clementi? This is much the same thing here. The four movements have a lot of unity.

Here's the Allegro, then. Do go over it with the score and the performance until you can see and hear all this. And take frequent breaks.

Development: four phrases each beginning with our clearly identified three note figure from phrase 1 at end of M16, M19, M21 and M23. The four phrases are 3 measures, 2 measures, 2 measures, 3 measures forming a nice archway centred on the very middle of the movement at M21 3/4.

phrase 7 notice the pedal D to balance the pedal G at the start of the movement. It keeps the mood calm at the start and allows the tension to rise when in starts to move in M20. The four triplets at M18 1/2 are M7 inverted and decorated.

phrase 8 is the closing theme inverted and the triplet replaced with a turn (a very common decoration in Haydn's music).

phrase 9 does the same but with a trill instead and a change of key.

phrase 10 is tricky. Take a little time with this and use your ear. It's phrase 4, M5-8 with a bit of variation. Notice how in the exposition it ushered in the second subject but here announces the recap'n. You might do a better job with your eyes if you work backwards but M25=M7.

Notice how the tension rises during these four phrases and is released with the recap'n.

The recap from M26 3/4 is pretty much bar for bar up to M42 when the closing theme is repeated once more.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/09/1206:06 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/09/1206:36 PM

Originally Posted By: Greener

Hi KS, yes thanks and agree. This is obvious for most of the B section in relating back to the A section. But, not so obvious for the first two lines (with exception of a couple of sporadic mentions of the first theme melody thrown in.) In this case, I'm not hearing a very good match. But, will keep trying

Here is what I am hearing with my "old ears". I'm going to reconstruct this freely into "ear player mode" and maybe if you play with it in that fashion you can mesh your old abilities with this new knowledge. Each person relates to music differently and old background is a strength rather than something to be set aside.

Mm. 1 - 2 (RH) is almost like a "riff" (if I understand that term properly) - some little melody pattern. We've got it again in mm 5 & 6. Then, if you were improvising that bit, I hear a variation of it in mm. 16 & 17. If you were doodling on the piano, maybe you'd come up with similar versions of it. Then when mm. 24 - 25, there's the same thing, but it's an octave below. Then mm 28 & 29, imagine you've got the same thing, but as composer you're saying "How the heck do I bring the melody up higher so that we can stay in the tonic? Hey, I'll climb up where I went down but use the same chord notes!" He's kept the same rhythm and the same chords. I recognize it as a version of the same thing.

I also use my knowledge that in this music phrases tended to be grouped in fours, and I can hear that rhythmically.mm. 1 - 4:dum deeda dum dum / dum deeda dum da / deedadeeda deedadeeda DUM (pause).Then there's another "dum deeda..." with more deedadeeda's that move the music into another place.

mm. 16 on we've got the dum deeda dum dum, but it's in an new key and it's taking off. I know from theory that sonatina form will have a development, so I'm looking further.

My next dum deeda dum dum happens in m. 24, and it happens after a big long REST which signals "we're changing gears here, folks!" Mm. 24 - to 27 are totally identical to the beginning, except for being in a lower octave.

I may not know what to do with the rest of it, so now I'm looking for the second theme and write (????) for m. 28 - 30.

Visually mm. 31 - 32 have my attention. You've got a line of notes like in a scale climbing up followed by four quarter notes: rhythm: deedadeeda deedadeeda /dum dum dum dum -twice. We have a match for 31 - 34 with mm. 8 - 11. If you play 31 - 34 and then 8 - 11, can you HEAR the same melody in a different key? We can write (????) for mm. 35 - 38. You'll probably hear similarities between 35 - 38 and 12 - 15.

You might now put yourself into the shoes of the composer for our (????). For mm. 28 - 30, you want to reflect mm. 5 - 7. You can't do the same thing, though, because the first time you were modulating to a new key, and this time you want to stay in the same key. So how can you keep a similar rhythm and feel and land on the desired note and key at the end? He does so by keeping our "da deeda dum dum" before taking off.

The second (???) is much closer to its counterpart.

This kind of thing works for me personally because I am in part a by ear and creative person, and in part have used written music all my life, but didn't really know how to read for some decades. I did this kind of feeling and sensing things. I'm going by a hunch that some of what I used to do might work for a by ear person.

Btw, I did some composition exercises in theory, and by trying to produce music there, it helped me understand the music here.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/09/1207:18 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/09/1207:23 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Yes, PianoStudent88 has the terminology but you have the content.

I think that these go hand in hand because you need both. When learning about sonata-form these three terms are essential: exposition, development, recapitulation. What they represent are also important, (concept) and only then does content have meaning.

EXPOSITION: The composer sets out the themes. This is all done in the same section. Usually the second theme or subject will be in a new key: usually dominant key or relative major or minor.

DEVELOPMENT: The composer plays around with some of the material.

RECAPITULATION: The themes will be brought in again. The theme which had been modulated is back in the tonic key.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/09/1208:31 PM

Ok, now I'm looking at the right piece.

My original response was to this.

Originally Posted By: Greener

Hi KS, yes thanks and agree. This is obvious for most of the B section in relating back to the A section. But, not so obvious for the first two lines (with exception of a couple of sporadic mentions of the first theme melody thrown in.) In this case, I'm not hearing a very good match. But, will keep trying

As I read on, I saw that originally there was a confusion about what sections and the titles meant so the confusion might have had more to do with what you were calling which.

I'm thinking that even if I had the wrong piece, maybe some of my ideas still can be used for any piece and this piece in particular. I mean three things:- listening, if you are an ear person, and even thinking of what you might do if you were improvising this yourself, in order to get into the composer's mindset- looking at rhythms that are the same- when you get to the second half of a theme especially, again as an ear player or budding composer, think of where the composer needs to go so you can anticipate some of what is going on.

I've looked at the First Allegro movement of the Haydn Divertimento now. I see the matching themes in the same places that Richard has set out. Now I'm looking at why I'm recognizing things, and what might be tricky.

** the end of m. 26 going into m. 27 is where the Recapitulation starts, with the first theme. Unlike the Clementi, there is no big pause with rests to alert us to a change of pace. Haydn flows from the development right into the Recapitulation. The concluding D in the bass creates the cadence that ends the Dev't, yet it also leads straight into the Recap. The thing that alerts us is the strong finality of the cadence, along with the mark telling us to emphasize the D. "The End". Also the visual appearance of the notes that follow; the same rhythm: even exactly the same notes.

Once you know where Theme 1 starts at the end of m. 26, I think it's easy to match it to the original. A couple of times something in the bass might be in a different octave, but it's the same.

I was first fooled in thinking that Theme 2 starts in m. 34 because it looks and sounds similar. But it actually starts at the end of m. 37. The original has a A7 chord, with the 7 in the melody repeat, and this is the start of the key of D major. M. 37 has has a D7 which is the V7 of G major; the tonic key which we want to have.

If I put myself in the shoes of the composer, I'm thinking at m. 34 where theme 1 ends, "How am I going to switch back into the key of G? so by creating a section of music that has the same shape as theme 2, and with those chord progressions, I can create a bridge back to G major, but do so almost seamlessly. Master craftsmen know how to hide their tricks.

Once I know that Theme 2 starts at the end of m. 38 and is in a new key, it is relatively easy to match it to the original Theme 2. Again putting myself into the composer's shoes, I'd want it to end in G, but add a bit of a flourish. It stays identical up to the first beat of m. 40 and then he adds a bit of a tail to it, extending the conclusion making it prettier and more final. That kind of extension is called "coda" which means "tail".

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/09/1210:02 PM

Thanks everyone for all the great information. I still have more thinking and listening to do on this. But went back and read again (several times) and with particular focus on the trouble spot for me, which was m17 through m26.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Development: four phrases each beginning with our clearly identified three note figure from phrase 1 at end of M16, M19, M21 and M23. The four phrases are 3 measures, 2 measures, 2 measures, 3 measures forming a nice archway centred on the very middle of the movement at M21 3/4.

phrase 7 notice the pedal D to balance the pedal G at the start of the movement. It keeps the mood calm at the start and allows the tension to rise when in starts to move in M20. The four triplets at M18 1/2 are M7 inverted and decorated.

So, if I understand correctly this section (m16 3/4 - m26 1/2) restates themes 1,2,3,4. Plus, when restating theme 1, he borrows some tricks from theme 4 for triplets in m18 1/2. Ever slick how, as you say, this forms archway centered on m21 1/2 and in middle of movement.

Not sure yet how to relate all this in terms of how it sounds, but will work on that next so as to try and relate this better in next movements.

You should see my score ... I think I'll need to print anew.

Feeling good, and having better understanding of new things to watch for now.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/10/1209:11 AM

Not exactly. M16-26 is the development but it isn't just restating themes. You might want to get a cup of tea, this could be long. (Here I go again!)

The exposition has at least two things in it; material in the tonic key and material in a contrasting key, usually the dominant or the relative major of a minor key tonic. There might also be an introduction to set the scene, like a prologue before the arrival of the main protagonists.

The material in the in tonic may be presented as one theme (e.g. Romeo) or more themes (e.g. the Montagues) made up from figures or motifs that I call germs, seeds, elements, etc.

There may also be a bridge passage where the composer moves gracefully from one key to the other or it may be a more sudden transition into the second subject material.

The material in the contrasting key may also be contrasting material, as it often is with Mozart and Beethoven, or more of a continuation, variation or development as it more often is with Haydn. Again it may be one theme (e.g. Juliet) or a group of themes (e.g. the Capulets). In a piece as short as this it would be discomfitting to have too much contrast; in a bigger piece it would need more to avoid monotony.

There is frequently, as in this divertimento, also a closing theme after the V-I cadence in the dominant. This may be to tell us that all the principal players have been introduced and the story is about to begin, or it may be to introduce minor characters such as Prince Escales or Friar Lawrence (continuing the R & J theme) or to set out the conflict between the warring families.

The second half begins with the development section. Here the composer tells the story by taking his themes and ideas and developing them. As long as he uses the germs, seeds and elements from the exposition as the basis for his wizardry the piece will have unity. He can also take his raw material from the introduction, bridge passage, and closing theme and he can add new material. This is where there will be changing keys, drama, conflict, plots and sub-plots and where most of our interest will be.

The recapitulation is a restatement of the initial ideas, not always as they were at the start but as they now are after the drama of the development section. But we want the Hollywood ending. We want the conflict to be over and the story to have a happy outcome. In the recapitulation the protagonsists all sing in the same key. We are satisfied.

There may or may not be an epilogue where all the loose ends are tied up, the principal characters may be gone but we are told the families will henceforth live in peace and they all live happily ever after.________________________

Once you've got the hang of this and have started seeing the patterns and connexions there aren't right and wrong answers. It's just how YOU see it. It's not like an archaeologist finding a bone and knowing what part of what extinct animal it is. There is a basic structure but much of it, especially the development, is more like cloud watching.

Keystring sees M37 as not being the true second theme. I see it as being ON the dominant rather than IN it, so for me it IS the second subject. In the Clementi I'm still undecided about M8 being bridge passage or second subject. It is what it is; it doesn't change because we see it differently, WE change because we see it differently.

It would be naïve to suggest that the composer wasn't aware of the connection between the various parts but at the end of the day he may simply have hit upon some phrases that sound good together without seeing the connexions. It doesn't matter whether he does it consciously or subconsciously as long as the result works. How we see the fragments is how we understand the piece. We hear a piece of music and think, "wow, that sounds good" but some of us want to know why. That's what analysis is. It's injecting connexions into the music that the composer may or may not have been aware of. The more we see, the better we understand and the more we can enjoy and the better our own compositions become.

I can enjoy Beethoven's fifth just listening to it but I revel in it knowing how it's put together. Liszt's B minor sonata was a mystery to me how anybody could enjoy listening to it. Until I analysed it. And now, for me, it's one of the greatest pieces of piano music ever written. I can't listen to the entrance of the fourth theme without shedding a tear. That's why I do this.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/10/1210:53 AM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Did you look yet at the things I pointed out in the Clementi? That will give you an idea of what to look for.

Yes, I was just getting on that.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Listen again to the recurrence of these little seeds that give this piece its unity, its sameness, as you play it or listen to it. They will register more clearly and sound will start to become or a more useful tool in your later analyses. It's easier to recognise a motif or theme slowed down than it is to see a group of quavers changed into crotchets. You might even recognise some of them in the next two movements.

OK, prep yourself now for a flawless interpretation of Menuet forthcoming ...

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/10/1209:38 PM

M2 is important measure and has variances throughout all movements. Obviously I did not catch this, but see the similarities (not sure hearing them all) in the corresponding measures you have pointed out.

Can you please explain ...

"Rising arpeggio at start, cf. falling arpeggio at start of allegro"

I'm not seeing or finding this the way I'm reading.

Sorry for lame response. I went over this so much today ... then had to take a break. Wish I could tell you I am hearing everything loud and clear, but not so much.

This arpeggio is so much easier to hear than it is to see because the principal notes come on the beat but visually they're surrounded by the dotted quaver/semiqvr rhythm. If I might borrow keystring's technical notation here I hear: da-DE-DUM, da-de-DUM, da-de-DUM contracted to ti-dum, dum, dum.

In the menuet I hear the first three notes duplicating this (I can hear the bass note as part of the phrase easier than I can see it), it's an octave drop without the inbetween note, just the slow ti-dum, dum. The M2 figure is the allegro's M3&4 figure (again incorporating the bass and easier to hear than see). M3&4 are the allegro's M6&7, M5 is M2 again but instead of anouncing the previous phrase now leads into the allegro's closing theme. It's easier to hear the variation than to see it on the page.

So the first half of the minuet is a gentle variation in 3/4 time of the allegro's exposition without the second theme. The second half starts with an inversion of the first half, M13 = M5 and the coda restore G major. Notice the menuet is in binary form:||: D - G :|||: Am - G :||

The Andante begins with a slower drawn out variation of the descending arpeggio, using a full two bars, the second two bars are the allegro's M7 again and another variation of the closing theme. The second half is the menuet with opening octave inverted and the 4-note figure reversed. We finish with another variation of the closing theme but note the phrase from M6 3/4 is a new figure, D-G-E-D repeated with variation - play this. You might hear it again. It's in binary form again with the same keys.

Onto the Allegro, and by this time I'm subconsciously expecting to start with another falling arpeggio, bit I'm presented with this upbeat rising one! How delightful! The second figure sounds familiar! Drop the C to a G and play it. You might recognise it. The M6 figure is the menuet's M2 with a quick recap of our closing theme again.

All four movements have such unity, such wholeness, they just BELONG together.

Originally Posted By: Greener

Sorry for lame response. I went over this so much today ... then had to

take a break. Wish I could tell you I am hearing everything loud and clear, but not so

much.

You're working like a Trojan, Jeff, and having to go it alone. I can whizz though this stuff quite quickly as I do it for every piece I learn and do a quick sketch of all the pieces I might learn in the future. I do a lot of rock and symphonic stuff, too. I also write my own material and this helps.

If you reduce the amout of time you spend each day on this you can put more effort into what you do and internalise the music more. That will make it easier to memorise and recognise the figures and themes and their variations and you'll hear them much better than when you see them. At the moment you've probably got a whole catalogue of figures from the Clementi still floating around with those of the Haydn and can't see one from t'other.

You might want to take a couple of days off, refresh your head and let the others catch up a bit. There seems to be very few participants for the amount of views the threads are getting and I doubt they're just enjoying the prose or the banter so the others may be trying to keep up with you and failing.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/11/1211:24 AM

This arpeggio is so much easier to hear than it is to see because the principal notes come on the beat but visually they're surrounded by the dotted quaver/semiqvr rhythm.

In the menuet I hear the first three notes duplicating this (I can hear the bass note as part of the phrase easier than I can see it), it's an octave drop without the inbetween note, just the slow ti-dum, dum. The M2 figure is the allegro's M3&4 figure (again incorporating the bass and easier to hear than see). M3&4 are the allegro's M6&7, M5 is M2 again but instead of anouncing the previous phrase now leads into the allegro's closing theme. It's easier to hear the variation than to see it on the page.

OK, see where you mean with the descending opening arpeggio now. I was flipping back and forth with the two Allegro's and getting messed up. I will go back and secure all of this. I think playing it will help for hearing vs. multiple windows open and trying to hear little snippets at full tempo.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

If you reduce the amout of time you spend each day on this you can put more effort into what you do and internalise the music more.

You might want to take a couple of days off, refresh your head and let the others catch up a bit.

Thanks, for the encouragement. I am determined to get this stuff. I will go over all of this until the light comes on. But, good advise and happy to at least slow down the tempo. Plus, I need to be careful I do not let my business suffer to much.

BTW, speaking of tempo. I am delighted to announce that I almost have the first A of Bach's little prelude no. 4 up to full tempo and mistake free. I really like what he is doing in M12-M16. This particular section is typical Bach to me and reminds me of others I have worked on. Seems these greats are also carrying ideas across other compositions.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/14/1209:46 AM

OK, I've gone over this at the keyboard now and puzzle pieces are coming together, I think. I still have more to do though, so, I'm not quite ready for any skill testing questions. As it is, you are quite right that this is a far bit easier to play by reading then say, the Bach preludes.

At any rate, excited to move forward. Where is everybody? We were about to fall of the first page here and can't let that happen.

How do we proceed from here?

BTW, I will be offline again this weekend (well, at least until late Sunday afternoon) so, otherwise only have a bit of time today to stir the pot again.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/14/1203:36 PM

I got run over by a truck (metaphorically speaking) for the first two pieces, and then could never get motivated to go over old ground to catch up. Maybe I'll be able to get in on the ground floor with Clementi 2.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/14/1204:26 PM

Just knowing that it's a Sonatina, and seeing from Greener's Youtube title that it's in G major, my expectations are:

2-4 movements.

First movement in a cut-down sonata-allegro form, at a fast tempo:Exposition: Start in G with one theme, modulate to D for a second theme. Then repeat this whole section.Development: Play with fragments of the themes in various keys, either established or fleeting. (Cut-down shows itself here, where not too much development happens.)Recapitulation: Restate both themes, both of them in G this time.

Second movement: slow.

Third movement: fast again.

Fourth movement (if there is one): another fast one.

Since it's Clementi, I'm expecting a thin texture with lots of twiddly bits running up and down in eighth notes. Actually, come to think of it, that's what Beethoven's Sonatinas are like too. So maybe this texture is a characteristic of Sonatinas overall.

OK, that's all without looking at or listening to the music. Now to listen and have a look, and see where my expectations are met, exceeded, or overturned.

I say this, not to try to guess what this is like without listening/looking, but rather to illustrate the expectations that are built up through experience. (Granted, I haven't got the widest experience -- maybe after we finish all six Clementi's I'll have revised expectations.)

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/15/1205:06 PM

Aurally: listened to this several times. Three movements, fast, slow, fast, each in a different time signature.

First movement:

I can't aurally catch the expected modulation from tonic to dominant in the exposition. After several listens, I can hear all the sections though: the opening 8 bar theme, the continuation and repeat of the exposition, the change to the development, the change back to the recapitulation, and the repeat of the development-recapitulation section.

I wasn't expecting the development-recapitulation section to repeat, but for the small scale of a sonatina, makes sense. Now I am curious as to whether this is common in sonatinas, or at least in Clementi sonatinas.

I can hear a distinct shift to a wierd sound at 0:47 where the development starts. Did it go into minor? I think so, but I'm not sure aurally. Also I can't tell if there are further modulations, or if the development stays in one key. But I am pleased that I can hear that something shifted, and in a big way.

I can hear that the end of the development just before 1:02 sounds very open-ended. So I'm expecting it's not a V-I cadence, but I won't know until I look at the score what it is. Then there's a silent pause, and the recapitulation begins. I'm not familiar enough with it to be able to catch how the bridge changes to stay in tonic instead of going to dominant as in the exposition.

The recapitulation ends with a more emphatic final chord than the exposition had.

I hear the piece in 2/4, with lots of sixteenth notes, as I expected. I know I said eighth notes before, but I was thinking in either cut-time or a very fast 4/4.

All of this is without looking at the score yet; I wanted to explore purely aurally and find out what I could hear before looking at the score.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/15/1205:32 PM

The modulation is hard to catch if you hear relatively like I do. I can do it now by fixing the pitch of the tonic or dominant note, and then noting that the pitch that was dominant now seems to be the tonic pitch later. It works for me with my freaky hearing. It may not work for someone else.

Where you hear something weird, I think this is where you are hearing the mode change (major to minor). Consider that a mode is also a mood or colour. So you're cluing in to something. The impression might be, "same thing as before, but it's wearing a different colour, or gives off a different feeling." If after this you look at the score, maybe you will start meshing what you know in theory and from looking at music, with what you are hearing.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/16/1204:17 PM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

All of this is without looking at the score yet; I wanted to explore purely aurally and find out what I could hear before looking at the score.

In contrast, my analysis approach so far has been primarily from the score (sitting on a bus for 2 hours yesterday, and again today ... what a relief to be home ... although the fair was fun and I didn't fall off any rides) and have just now gone back to verify, and think I'm OK (or hopefully close.)

Everything you are saying, PS88 is pretty much lining up with where I was going. Hopefully we also concur with the same places:

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/16/1205:21 PM

A is the exposition and it ends at the double bar. B is the development and recapitulation and it begins at the double bar.

A cursory glance at the score thus shows that the exposition finishes partway through M22.

This sonatina does not begin with an intro but sets out on the first subject. We have a phrase here taking up four measures, which is then repeated with a modified close on the dominant (a V-I cadence) in M8. The question is whether the second subject, which starts in M8, finishes at the double bar or in M18 where a closing theme begins. There isn't a right or wrong answer, btw.

This first subject material does not repeat in M12. I suspect a problem with the Toronto buses or delayed reaction to devilish fair rides.

After the double bar we are in the development section and what is of interest here requires our analytical skills. What keys does the composer go through and where does the material come from? The exposition will include much of the material but we need to be open to new material emerging.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/16/1206:31 PM

Whenever you start right into your analysis, it always spells trouble for me.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

You are right with the recapitulation.

Thank goodness I had something right.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

After the double bar we are in the development section and what is of interest here requires our analytical skills. What keys does the composer go through and where does the material come from? The exposition will include much of the material but we need to be open to new material emerging.

OK, please leave with me a moment. I had this all prepared, but I'm a littler nervous about releasing it now, just yet. So will go back and double check a few things.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/16/1208:38 PM

M23-25 = M1-3, yes, and the development is in A minor.

M26 is missing - I'm using the numbering you did in the link

M25,27,28 form a threefold copy of M3/M4 (1st subj, 1st phrase)M29 = M9 in reverse, leading to second half of developmentM30 cleverly uses M24 to tie the two halves togetherM31 begins a threefold copy of the second half of M9 overlapping withM32 = M9 in reverse, this time leading toM33,34,35 a threefold copy of M7/8 inverted (1st subj, 2nd phrase)M36 = M9 in reverse, this time leading to

M37 = recapitulation.

Note in recap the second phrase is played a fourth lower to bridge to the second subject in tonic.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/17/1207:33 AM

On closer inspection there are four four-note figures used in the development.

The turn from M7 in M25Its inverse & reverse from M3 in M27-29 and M32-36The reverse of the end of M9 in M31 andThe four note rise from M10 LH in M29, M32 and M36

The only place you went wrong, Jeff, was in the recap'n which is bar for bar from M38=M1 with modifications in M49 and M55 that threw you a bit.

You considered M33-37 as new material (I suppose this could be considered the dominant pedal/preparation) but for me is still made up of previous material, M3 fig with inverse of M8.

Note that M24 is G#m7b5 (half diminished seventh on the leading note of A minor harmonic) but M30 introduces G major by stealth, using F#m7b5 (half diminished seventh on the leading note of G major), a chord alien to A minor, and moves to D major (chord not key) apparently heading for C#-D in M37 but stops and pauses on the unexpected C natural, the subdominant of the home key, signalling the return of G major and beginning the recapitulation.

Also conceptually, the development begins at the double bar. It may develop material from the exposition (here with modulating bar 1 to A minor) or it may introduce new material (not the case here unless you want to consider M24 LH as new material).

In binary form we noted the two halves as A and B. In sonata form we use a and b to mark the first and second subjects and tend not to use A and B so much; their significance is greatly reduced since we can refer by name to the exposition, development and recapitulation.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/17/1209:00 PM

Couldn't M31 be looked at as a double use of the second half of M3? Or, is there a reason we would prefer m9 second half reverse?

ON SECOND THOUGHT: OK, I think I see why now. The notes in four note group (although the pattern looks similar) need to be separated by the exact same intervals. Is this why?

It's me being picky, Jeff.

I've played through this reading the semiq. groups as quaver pairs on the beat. Those notes tend to either duplicate the quaver pair at the start of M3 or the one at the start of M4. It makes a difference to me.

You may prefer to hear them all as a single rhythmic unit. We don't know how Clementi saw them or conjured them up. We can only use our own imaginations and interpretations.

What I'm trying to do is make you aware of patterns and figures; elements that give a piece unity. Look at how he manipulates them. And how he is using them.

Remember the tension and release of earlier pieces, and the building up of expectations? Look how he's put these elements together.

In M30 he announces the return of G major without sounding it.Then he begins a sequence in M31 beginning the half bars on B and A so that we expect a tonic G in M32. But he makes E minor in the bass and finishes with a run up to the dominant D major in M33. In M33-36 he's building up with the first note of each bar from the D towards a tonic G using a rising figure to increase the anticipation and build the tension. By M37 you're desperate for G and he hangs you out with a sparse dominant 7th. When the recapitulation starts on the tonic key it's such a joyful return but still he holds out till the end of M38 to give us that G an octave higher. I really savour that C natural in M37.

If you can't hear these things and see how he does it, how can you give the piece its best interpretation?

Or if you're just listening how much more can you enjoy it when you can feel the excitement and anticipation of events?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/18/1208:27 AM

If you can't hear these things and see how he does it, how can you give the piece its best interpretation?

Or if you're just listening how much more can you enjoy it when you can feel the excitement and anticipation of events?

I shall count myself among the converted.

Are we complete with first Allegretto? What? I see we have another Allegretto now. What does Allegretto even mean? Thanks google ... "fairly lively and fast"

OK, so are we continuing with the lively and fast now, or shall we wait for others? At any rate and in preparation, I see only 28 measures in this 2nd movement (that is if I counted correctly this time) and no repeats. So, one quarter the length of first movement.

I understand there is likely to be some re-use of material from 1st movement (although it does not appear to be waving a red flag) but otherwise should I be expecting an exposition, development and recapitulation again? Just trying to avoid setting myself up for disaster.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/18/1209:27 AM

I think you're spearheading the operation, Jeff. Hopefully some of the catcher-uppers will offer something we've missed in the previous pieces or join in wherever you are. There does seem to be a lot of views for the number of participants. Be careful, Jeff, they may just be waiting to pounce on your next mis-step!

What to expect?

Typically only the first movement will be in sonata form. Certainly with these sonatinas that's the case.

The final movement is likely to be fast but not as intellectually engaging as a sonata form movement. The middle movement should present a gentler contrast usually with a change of key but don't expect much modulation.

Typically, and in a very general sense, the first movement will present you with technical fingerwork (scale, arpeggio and broken chord work) and architectural passages, pointing out themes and so on. The middle movement will offer an opportunity to develop your cantabile and the final movement to test your velocity and articulation.

There shouldn't be any exposition, development and recapitulation in the sense of a sonata form movement but you are likely to see a simple ABA form where the middle will be a contrast to the beginning and end. In Haydn's sonata the double bar in the menuet signalled a binary form movement rather than sonata form.

For the sonatina to have unity there should be an overlap of material but it's more likely in the outer movements. The middle movement will offer more contrast and may not be recognisably from the same sonatina. Of course, you are free to find something you can latch on to. It may be a very simple thing like one of the four-note figures. If I were writing a middle movement I would look at the jump from B to G in M1 or the two G's after the B, or even all three notes together as food for thought or inspiration.

But I'm not Clementi.

There may be nothing more than that he felt the movements went well together or that he composed them on the same day or after listening to the same jingle on his local radio station.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/18/1210:25 AM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Be careful, Jeff, they may just be waiting to pounce on your next mis-step!

OK, thanks for the added pressure.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

The middle movement will offer more contrast and may not be recognisably from the same sonatina. Of course, you are free to find something you can latch on to. It may be a very simple thing like one of the four-note figures.

I shall gingerly pace along here and see if I can identify what Mr. Clementi was up to and will advise.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

There may be nothing more than that he felt the movements went well together or that he composed them on the same day or after listening to the same jingle on his local radio station.

Yes, I am sure it was something like that. For some reason TV commercial jingles always stick in my head, so quite likely he had the same problem; "Buy ... Mennen"

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/18/1202:19 PM

I am surprised they call this movement Allegretto as it does not sound "lively and fast" to me.

We are in a new time signature 3/4 (here we go waltzing again. Well not quite but it does have a dancing type of lightness to it.)

We start off in C major and appears we move to G major (wait ... A minor again, sounds minor) just after the double bar and then until the middle of m16. Then back to C major for the duration.

Although we are in different time signature, the stepping down (M7) down, up, down, up, down (M8-m14), sounds like it may be coming from the same idea of M20 second half and M21 of first movement. He uses this again in M23 and M27.

Otherwise, everything else sounds and feels quite unique in this movement. Although M3 and 1/2 of 4 (and used elsewhere) reminds me of the theme from the Jolly Green Giant.

I knew I'd heard this somewhere before and turns out it was from my regular morning programming .

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/18/1202:26 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/18/1203:38 PM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Greener, how are you confusing G major and A minor? Or does it have sections of both? (Must.Look.At.Score.)

It must be G Major (F#). I was confusing with the G# to think A minor. But, G# right away goes natural again, so left with F# and clearly not A minor. Although, it sounds minor to me. But, no minor will fit, so I am now thinking it must be G major.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/18/1204:39 PM

I see we have our harmony whizz kid back again!

Whenever you see a sharped accidental, Jeff, it's usually the seventh or a passing chromaticism. As we're in C the next sharp we can expect will be F# (the seventh of G major) or G# (the seventh of A minor).

Allegretto is between Andante, walking pace, and Allegro, running speed. So this is a jaunty pace like a child skipping through a forest. The posted recording drags far too much for my liking.

I see no real connexion with the first movement. If I play the first note of each pair, E-C-G, E-C-G it reminds me of the figure in M1 of the Allegro but it's distant.

We have the antecedent in M1-4 and the consequent in M5-8, a middle-8 at M9 and a reprise at M17.

After the first three measures of the middle section we start a climb to the climax of the piece on the G then begin the stepping top and bottom in M16 to the return of C major in M17. M24 is a nice touch before a repeat of the consequent to close.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/18/1204:58 PM

There is perhaps a harmonic link to the first movement: A minor then G major in the middle section.

I've looked at the places at the beginning and end of the Development in movement 1 where I heard curious things, and I'm not sure now if I was hearing key (beginning) and cadence (end), or if I was hearing chord quality. The beginning gives us a dim7 chord when the LH comes in. The end gives us a dominant 7 chord (open, as Richard points out). Both of those are curious things, so I'm glad I heard something curious at those points: one as an odd chord, and the other as an odd cadence.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/18/1205:41 PM

I'm still poking my nose under the tent when I get a chance.

Right now my problem is that my teacher has my plate very full (partly thanks to my mentioning the Moonlight thread to her...bang...assigned) You can bet I won't be mentioning Clementi 2 at my next lesson

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/18/1209:47 PM

Glad to see everyone still milling about.

Afraid I need to disclose more of my elementary understanding; This time re: time signatures. I never really knew what they meant. Just pretended I did. I figure it is about time I close yet another gap.

We just had 3/4 time, so three beats to a bar, but not quite sure what the 4 is all about at all. Now we are heading into 3/8 time. So, still three beats to a bar, but no clue of what the 8 is all about.

In first movement we had 2 beats to a bar, and is over 4 so understand this is cut time.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/18/1209:54 PM

Time signature. There is simple time, and the "other one" which I learned as "compound time" but apparently that name is in dispute. Erm?

Simple time is like 2/4, 3/4, 4/4, 2/8, 3/8, 4/8

The top number means how many beats there are in a measure. The bottom number means which note value gets a beat. So in 2/4 time there are two beats to a measure, often getting a rhythm of [STRONG weak]. The quarter (1/4) note gets the beat. 3/4 time has three beats to a measure, again the quarter note gets the beat, [STRONG weak weak]. 3/8 also has three beats to a measure, but the eighth note gets the beat. 4/4 or 4/8 has four beats, typically [STRONG weak Middle weak], with the quarter note, and the eighth note, getting the beat, respectively.

The relationship of the other notes relative to each other still stays the same. So in 4/8 time, if the eighth note gets the beat, there are 4 eighth notes to a measure, 2 quarter notes to a measure (they're twice as long), etc.

The other kind of time: 6/8, 9/8, 12/8 often goes in triplets and I learned to call this compound time. For example:6/8 (1-2-3) (4-5-6) eighth notes = 2 beats of 3 sets of triplets.9/8 (1-2-3) (4-5-6) (7-8-9) = 3 beats X 3 sets of triplets.12/8 has four sets.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/18/1210:09 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/18/1210:20 PM

Fire away with questions if they come up. Actually I can make it simpler. For the time signatures in question, the top number says how many beats per measure, and the bottom says which note value gets the beat. End of story.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/19/1211:34 AM

I see no real connexion with the first movement. If I play the first note of each pair, E-C-G, E-C-G it reminds me of the figure in M1 of the Allegro but it's distant.

We have the antecedent in M1-4 and the consequent in M5-8, a middle-8 at M9 and a reprise at M17.

Forgot about the antecedent, consequent and reprise connotations so will try to keep these in mind moving forward. PS88 raises an interesting point regarding the keys transition and harmonic comparison to first Allegretto. Otherwise though, seems Mr. Clementi was in a new frame of mind and the only clear common thread is that it was written by the same hand.

Lets see what 3rd movement has in store for us. Much larger it appears, but again no repeats. In 3/8 time now and lots of triplet use is apparent.

What happened to your performance posting Keystring? I liked it too and was about to go back to it for this further analysis, but ... see no longer there.

Any tips, cautions or general things to keep an eye out for in 3rd movement?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/19/1207:09 PM

Not totally out to lunch, Jeff, but still having conceptual difficulties. From my post at the top of the page:

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

The final movement is likely to be fast but not as intellectually engaging as a sonata form movement...There shouldn't be any exposition, development and recapitulation in the sense of a sonata form movement but you are likely to see a simple ABA form where the middle will be a contrast to the beginning and end.

We don't need much analysis to determine where the exposition ends and the development begins. We just look for the double repeat bar.

There we can expect to see a final cadence in a contrasting key, usually the dominant so in this case we can expect to see a final cadence in D. At the double repeat bar.

And the development section begins at the double repeat bar.

Beethoven's sonatas do not repeat the second half but early Haydn, Mozart and Clementi sonatas do.

How can we tell Sonata form from Binary form? In sonata form the material heard in the contrasting key, all of it, will be heard again in the tonic key in the recapitulation, usually preceded by a restatement of the tonic material as well, albeit slightly modified.

What you do have is the keys, themes and main sections.___________________________

Yes, PianoStudent88, this is simple ternary form, ABA. The showmanship finish is hardly grounds for the extra apostrophe in my book however.

The first verse is four lines, M1-4, slightly modified at M9-12, all tonic-dominant harmony, a third line in Am - D and a fourth line on the dominant returning to the second verse at M17.

Verse two closes with a V-I cadence at the end of a seven measure line 3 (or 2+5 for lines 3 and 4).

The B section begins at M32. M40 serves to break up more of the four squaredness. I agree that the G major in M33 is the dominant of D not tonic as the A7 in M35 reveals. M49-74 is the second half of the B section and again M73/4 breaks up the four-square feel.

All the accidentals in A are pure colour.

The first two lines remind me so much of the second movement. Play the first note of each pair in M1-4 of the Allegretto and then the first 8 measures here. Also the rhythm in M41-48 recalls the skipping feel.

And the first two phrases of the opening movement and this ending with that same rhythm using here the four note figure from M9 of the opening movement.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/19/1210:02 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Not totally out to lunch, Jeff, but still having conceptual difficulties. From my post at the top of the page:

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

The final movement is likely to be fast but not as intellectually engaging as a sonata form movement...There shouldn't be any exposition, development and recapitulation in the sense of a sonata form movement but you are likely to see a simple ABA form where the middle will be a contrast to the beginning and end.

Yes, I recall this note for expectations on 2nd movement, and wish I had read this again for this movement. I actually went searching for insight that might help me avoid doom, but somehow missed this and rather came across another note somewhere in this thread that led me to think that we could very well come across a full sonata form movement again. That is what I thought I was seeing.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

How can we tell Sonata form from Binary form? In sonata form the material heard in the contrasting key, all of it, will be heard again in the tonic key in the recapitulation, usually preceded by a restatement of the tonic material as well, albeit slightly modified.

OK, rules are good. So, should be able to know when we are seeing a true Sonata form now (albeit not likely to be overly obvious) when it is encountered.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

The first verse is four lines, M1-4, slightly modified at M9-12, all tonic-dominant harmony, a third line in Am - D and a fourth line on the dominant returning to the second verse at M17. . .Play the first note of each pair in M1-4 of the Allegretto and then the first 8 measures here. Also the rhythm in M41-48 recalls the skipping feel. . .And the first two phrases of the opening movement and this ending with that same rhythm using here the four note figure from M9 of the opening movement.

Not sure I am totally getting what you are meaning in the first phrase here. At any rate, I am past my piano curfew now, but will come back to this, at the keyboard in the AM, to review everything and be sure it comes clear.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/20/1206:17 AM

Originally Posted By: Greener

Not sure I am totally getting what you are meaning in the first phrase here.

My first phrase that you quoted, "The first verse is four lines..." or Clementi's first phrase?

My first phrase: I see this like a sung verse.Line 1 = M1-4, line 2 = M5-8, line 3 = M9-12 (or two short lines?) and line 4 = M13-16. The end of lines 3 and 4 are modified in the second verse for leading into the B section.

Sidebar: If this were sonata form the end of the first 'verse' would lead into the second subject in D major. If I were composing this I would change M16 from A-B-D-C-B-A to A-B-A-G-F#-E and lead instead to D major probably with a reverse/inverse of M13-14 leading up to the inverse of M41-48.

Clementi's first phrase:This would be so much easier on a piano but...

Look at the first movement and consider the bars now in 3/8 time and drop the last quaver in each bar (including the upbeat before M1).M1 is now D (1/4 note) B (1/8 note)M2 is now G (dotted 1/4)M3 is now D-D-D (1/8 notes)M4 is now B (dotted 1/4)

D---B, G, D-D-D, B;D---B, G, D-D-D, A;

Or play it like the Allegro:

D-D-D, B-G-D, D-D-D, B

Or with the four-note figure:D-D-D, B-G-D, D-GABG-A______________________

For the second movement replace the paired notes with crotchets: E-C-G, E-C-G, E-A-D, B-C.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/20/1209:06 AM

It took me awhile (was not from a lack of trying) to get this. But, yes I believe I get in now. At first I felt more commonality with these measures to the first movement. My trouble I think, was interpreting and applying everything correctly. Yes, sorry I am a little slow. After re-reading and also previous quote below (to make sure I was on correct movement/measures) I believe I've got it ... I think I've got it ... "The rain in Spain stays mainly in the plain"

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

The first two lines remind me so much of the second movement. Play the first note of each pair in M1-4 of the Allegretto and then the first 8 measures here. Also the rhythm in M41-48 recalls the skipping feel.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/20/1210:43 AM

Richard, I don't get what you're getting at in your last post. It seems like there are only so many ways to put together notes if you're going to deedle about on basically the notes of a chord, so some similarities are going to happen just because there aren't very many combinatorial possibilities. Even so, I don't even see the similarity between the different sequences of notes you're highlighting.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/20/1210:45 AM

There's more, of course, that I hear but it's so hard when I can't just sit at the piano and play it for you.

These movements belong very much together but it's very difficult to point out the unifying features when you have to massage the notes so much to explain it.

The thing to take away from this is that there's a lot of unity in the work. The three movements belong together. You might have to sit down with some of the elements and work on the first note of each bar, the notes on the beat or some such alteration to hear the main linking ideas and play around with them, improvising and such. You may pick up what the composer didn't intend but it all helps to present the piece in your own interpretation.

Sometimes I feel More familiar with a work when I've tried to re-compose it on my own or in my own way. It also helps me understand what the composer has gone through and mostly see what he probably came up with and rejected. Typically my ideas will be the ones the composer left on the cutting room floor, but still it helps me see.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/20/1211:12 AM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

[...]when you have to massage the notes so much to explain it.

Sounds like Rorschach ink blots to me. I will look/listen closer, though.

You know what this means? It means I'm going to have to go back to the discussions of Clementi 1 and the Haydn and see if I can understand how to find this thematic unity there also, to get practice in this. Rats.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/20/1211:19 AM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Richard, I don't get what you're getting at in your last post. It seems like there are only so many ways to put together notes if you're going to deedle about on basically the notes of a chord, so some similarities are going to happen just because there aren't very many combinatorial possibilities. Even so, I don't even see the similarity between the different sequences of notes you're highlighting.

Do you hear any unity between the three movements?

My notes aren't to manipulate the notes to fit but to help you hear what I'm hearing in them, isolating what are, for me, the unifying characteristics.

What I hear is:1st Movement:D---B, G, D-D-D, B = B-G-D

2nd Movement:E-C-G, E-C-G, E-A-D, B-C = E-C-G, B-C

3rd Movement:G-G-G, A-D-C, B---G A = G-D-B, G-A

The themes in these three movements are variations on the same skeleton. I hear it. I'm having difficulty conveying what I'm hearing.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/20/1211:30 AM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

The thing to take away from this is that there's a lot of unity in the work. The three movements belong together. You might have to sit down with some of the elements and work on the first note of each bar, the notes on the beat or some such alteration to hear the main linking ideas and play around with them, improvising and such. You may pick up what the composer didn't intend but it all helps to present the piece in your own interpretation.

Agree. I hear the unity and they work nicely together.

Working through these exercises I have actually needed to play by reading. It helps me immensely of course, to have a clear recollection of how it goes in having listened to it so much.

My experience is that once I become really entrenched in a piece (for me this only comes with playing it) will I start to hear more things/similarities (likely plenty more) come to light.

From what I have gone over so far, this one does not appear like it would be too tough to tackle. And will probably be even better practice for my reading then Bach, where I truly need to go at a snails pace until I memorize it.

Of course, I will need to be selective on the ones I choose, as will never keep up with all of them. But think I will add this one to the list as the Bach is under control now and just bringing it up to presentation standard.

From an analysis stand point, at least for me, I think his one was a good one to do. I did not feel as far out of my element as I had with others. So, feeling good again. Albeit, confidence is not full steam yet.

Is there any more to discuss on this one? Or, is everyone still game to move along?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/20/1211:34 AM

I don't hear any particular disunity, but I don't hear anything that ties these together more than just being in the general genre of music deedling about up and down in a fairly conservative harmonic language.

ETA: Greener and Richard, in addition to hearing the unity between the three movements of the Sonatina 2, do you hear these as being different from the Sonatina 1? I have the feeling that if I jumbled up the movements of these six Sonatinas, this type of picking out of notes could find similarities between any two chosen at random.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/20/1211:42 AM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Sounds like Rorschach ink blots to me.

In a lot of ways, it is. But there is definitely stuff there to hear.

If you spend more time listening to how the composer has manipulated the exposition material in the development section you will have a better chance at hearing 'between the lines' in the other movements.

Even if you don't always hear it, just trying will improve the ability to hear.

Twenty years ago they started producing pictures of what looked like geometric patterns but they had other images concealed within them. Some people could see the other images, others couldn't. I guess this is a similar situation.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/20/1211:50 AM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/20/1211:57 AM

Originally Posted By: Greener

Is there any more to discuss on this one? Or, is everyone still game to move along?

I'm game to move along. I'm just going to be playing major catchup on the thematic details stuff from what you've done so far, but no reason to wait up for me on that. I think that's just going to be a long teeth-gnashing project for me.

Shall we do Clementi Sonatina 3? I would like to do all 6 Clementi Sonatinas, for the practice.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/20/1212:02 PM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

...Richard, in addition to hearing the unity between the three movements of the Sonatina 2, do you hear these as being different from the Sonatina 1?

I was going to come to that. It's a composers style. Some people profess to be able to distinguish Haydn from Mozart. Others cannot. I'm still unsure. I heard a piece of unfamiliar piano music and couldn't tell if it was Mozart or Beethoven. I was totally flummoxed. I knew all of Beethoven's 32 so I figured it had to be one of Mozart's unfamilar sonatas which would have made it an early one and it just didn't sound early. It turned out to be Clementi. I've been a huge fan of his ever since.

There are some things, such as the four-notes figures we've just been looking at, that will come up again and again, but the way they are handled tends to be unique to the composer/period/style.

The famous Rachmaninov variation 18 on Paganini's caprice features the very four note figure we've just been discussing. I don't think either Paganini or Rachmaninov were inspired by this sonatina!

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/20/1204:24 PM

Thanks, Gary. Actually I was wondering about that. But I figured Eb and Gb was close enough to D# and F# for me. But, had a feeling there wasn't something right about this. Plus, the Ab in the next measure was kind of bothering me, but I dismissed it since it didn't show up any more ... thank goodness.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/20/1205:58 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

E minor in M18-22? What is happening in the bass/LH? (important for establishing key)What is happening in RH? (not as important)

Guess we are still in G Major then. The D# was causing me grief and I felt I needed to deal with it. When I listen now though, it appears more like just colour and I needn't have got in such a fret about it.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Why in the recap did he modify M7-12 for M42-48?

Why did he introduce M57-58?

I will take a look at these next and see what I can suggest.

Originally Posted By: Gary D.

Richard, I'm being VERY careful because it looks like everything is going nicely and I do NOT want to crash the party!

Crash away, Gary. I'm not as delicate as I appear. I thought I was getting away with having just one measure wrong ... but NOPE

This is a real can of worms for my students, Richard. Some "chords" can simply be heard as contrary motion passing tones OR as chords, depending on POV.

I did not use slashes to show bass. And the concept or "rootless" chords is important to me, but often people will insist calling something like E G C#, technically a C#dim chord, as a VIIdim in some key rather than a rootless V7 in some key.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/20/1206:56 PM

Originally Posted By: Gary D.

...the concept or "rootless" chords is important to me, but often people will insist calling something like E G C#, technically a C#dim chord, as a VIIdim in some key rather than a rootless V7 in some key...

Good point, Gary. I was also considering the ambiguity, too, of diads/sparse chords. It can be an easy way of changing direction fluidly and you can build expectation but add surprise without alerting the listener the way a dim7 chord might.

And thank you for keeping me alert!

Originally Posted By: Greener

Recapitulation M36 - M64: I believe we are starting in G Major this time, moving to E minor at M42 and then to C Major at M47 and for duration.

Jeff, you might want to double check how and where the recap'n differs from the opening measures. You might try a measure by measure comparison.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/20/1207:16 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Why in the recap did he modify M7-12 for M42-48?

Why did he introduce M57-58?

Of course, I had everything that Gary said . Plus, I was also thinking that M42-M48 has been modified to instill more authority towards a climax at 45 (tension) and release at M46-M48. This is a very cool sounding passage.

For M57-M58: seems like a nice melodic adventure in breaking up the close. He is bringing back the idea from M52 to pull back a bit, before the final resolution.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/20/1207:50 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Originally Posted By: Gary D.

...the concept or "rootless" chords is important to me, but often people will insist calling something like E G C#, technically a C#dim chord, as a VIIdim in some key rather than a rootless V7 in some key...

Good point, Gary. I was also considering the ambiguity, too, of diads/sparse chords. It can be an easy way of changing direction fluidly and you can build expectation but add surprise without alerting the listener the way a dim7 chord might.

And thank you for keeping me alert!

I should mention that "analysis" is always 100% practical for me. I have a strong ear, so hearing what something is gives me no problems. I am a very strong reader, so I am able to start from scratch and learn things very quickly. I can play a lot of music with scores that other people could not. Where is my weakness?

Memory. So my DECADES of careful stress on structure, especially on chord structure, is all about creating a road-map for myself that allows me to play from memory with complete confidence. I use this much the way a gig player uses a lead sheet. It's sort of like memorizing the lead sheet, if that makes any sense.

But I apply this logic to ALL music, and that is also why I tend not to use RNs too often. So much of the music I am interested in goes far beyond convenient functional harmony.

Even here, in the section I mentioned, what Clementi is really doing involves solid principles. One moment he is solidly in the key of C, then suddenly he hits Dm, backs up to A7, and then moves forward to D7 to G, B7 to Em, E7 to Am, A7 to Dm, and finally when he lands on F#m7b5, it is the same thing as a rootless D9, just a fancy version of D7, to go to G. All circle of 5ths, or secondary dominance, and I would NOT want to write that out in RNs. For just a moment he starts hitting the sophistication and inventiveness of Mozart and Beethoven, and that's why it is so interesting.

Just to flesh this out, I don't much like Clementi and so have never taught this sonata. Without the score I would not even know the theme, but by looking at the score, without going near a piano, I can audiate perfectly, hearing every note. And I think that a really careful study of chords and harmony has greatly increased my ability to audiate clearly even though I was already able to do it when quite young.

Just letting you know where I am coming from. Analysis to me gives us many valid views of what happens, and whatever helps us hear or read or memorize faster, or interpret with more understanding, that is a good thing!

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/21/1209:06 AM

In the exposition he led us a merry dance from M5 which I fully expected to take us to the dominant for the second subject and he ends in M12 firmly established in C major still (I-V-I).

Now we're in the recapitulation. Everything's expected to be in tonic so the bridge passage that never was no longer needs to take us anywhere - and what does he do now? He leads us on another merry dance to finish on the dominant!

I don't get the circle of fifths motion going on. What I get is a sequence from M40 that looks like it's building up to go from A down to D but the RH in 42 changes to anticipate a drop from G to C but by the time LH reaches C in M44, RH is already leading us up the garden path to another heading that leaves me on G major, precisely where I expected to end up in the exposition, but not in G major, there's a definite feeling of hanging on the dominant here rather than being in it.

I have M43 as G, F aug 6, E, G6.

The D7 at the end of M42 makes me read M43 as starting on G not Em. This is the kind of ambiguity I referred to earlier. I want to call the second chord here an Italian sixth but we're not in A major though I want that E major following to be an A maj 7 without root or third. I don't get B7 at all. The G6/Em7 wants to be G7 but is making sure the following C is not a resolution. Muzio is still amusing us.

I agree with the rest of your chords, Gary but I didn't get as far as naming them in M45. That's just a sequence to G, for me.

46 and 47 are G, G7, C, G11 so without D/D7 I don't get resolution in 48 here but an imperfect cadence and suspense.

The little and subtle changes from the end of M53 to M59 are very clever. The E at the start of 57 is gorgeous. Apart from the added enjoyment I can't see why he chose to do this apart from coming down an octave.

Originally Posted By: Gary D.

Analysis to me gives us many valid views of what happens, and whatever helps us hear or read or memorize faster, or interpret with more understanding, that is a good thing!

I'm the same way. But for me harmonic analysis is only a part of the process and seldom the first thing. For me it begins with the melody or thematic material. Only when the harmony is interesting will I bother naming chords or look at what they're doing. Melody, rhythm, harmony, unity, tension/release, sequences, variations and those 'tingle' factors we looked at in the Chopin Prelude. I start with what jumps out at me the most and look at the others as I see fit.

M5-12 and M42-48 are the sorts of places where the harmony is worth looking at.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/21/1209:53 AM

We've only just begun and I already feel massively behind. I played through movement 1 and I like it. It seems more complex than the previous sonatinas we've looked at. Listening to movements 2 and 3, they don't sound as complex. I don't mean movement 1 complex as in hard to play -- it actually felt easier than when I've previously tackled Clementi -- but the sound of it, the harmony, seemed more complex. I'm still reeling from the G A F# in m.25.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/21/1210:01 AM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/21/1202:49 PM

So I thought maybe I would pick up some actual printed editions of Clementi and Kuhlau sonatinas. I've read good things about the Schirmer Masterworks editions of these, edited by Jennifer Linn. So I zipped over to the music store, and they actually had the Kuhlau in stock! But I left empty-handed, because... I couldn't stand it. Big huge print that makes each movement take several pages, necessitating either copying or awkward page turns (I'm not planning to memorize these). Really almost no useful extra information beyond what I pretty much know already and care about. Ornament realizations written out above the staff, but I'm willing to trust my current knowledge of ornaments. There was a chart of particular skills that are exercised in particular in each movement, but nothing esoteric that I need to know, I think, that I won't find out just playing the piece. So, although I think these are good student editions, they just didn't interest me. Too bad, because I don't really like playing from imslp printouts: they droop. I wonder if the imslp edition we're using is available in print.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/21/1203:16 PM

I don't get the circle of fifths motion going on. What I get is a sequence from M40 that looks like it's building up to go from A down to D but the RH in 42 changes to anticipate a drop from G to C but by the time LH reaches C in M44, RH is already leading us up the garden path to another heading that leaves me on G major, precisely where I expected to end up in the exposition, but not in G major, there's a definite feeling of hanging on the dominant here rather than being in it.

My writing was sloppy. These guys all build suspense and interest by writing V-I, in some key, then jumping to another V in another key and again going V-I or V-Im.

Examples, M42 to M48: A7-Dm, D7-G, B7-E, E7-Am, A7-Dm, rootless D9-G, then toggle, G7-C, D7-G, G7-C, and so on. Now, E7 to A7 to D9 to G7 is circle of 5ths. The other V-I relationships can all be seen IN the circle of 5ths. It’s a mixture of two different “tricks”. The other is like this:

C7 F, D7 G, E7 Am, and so on. I don’t have a name for that.

Quote:

I have M43 as G, F aug 6, E, G6.

Problem – there is no Faug6 chord. I know what you are talking about. You could write F(#6) to show the augmented 6th spelling, but you are going to be in deep doo-doo when you hit an F7b5 spelled as an augmented 6th chord, which may be spelled this way in some keys: – F A B D#. If you are going by spelling, that would be #4 and #6. But your G6 chord is wrong. You forgot the G# is still there. That’s a 3rd inversion E7 chord.

Quote:

The D7 at the end of M42 makes me read M43 as starting on G not Em.

Definitely G. No question. That’s how I heard it, how I saw it, and I have NO idea why I wrote Em. I had a five minute break and wrote in a flash. Big mistake, Richard!

Quote:

I agree with the rest of your chords, Gary but I didn't get as far as naming them in M45. That's just a sequence to G, for me.

I would be happy with Dm for all but the last eighth note, but I hear a change from Dm to D “something” there.

Quote:

46 and 47 are G, G7, C, G11 so without D/D7 I don't get resolution in 48 here but an imperfect cadence and suspense.

G11 is wrong, Richard. That would be G B D F A C. Instead you have F#-C, clearly showing D7 by context, and it is over a G pedal. You have a pedal tone for two measures. So G G7 C D7 G ALL over pedal G. Writing the long way: G G7 C/G D7/G G.

For HEARING I pick up melody and bass first, which immediately gives me the chords. But I do all the other things you mentioned, looking for ANY kind of detail that gives me clues about how I want to play something.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/21/1205:14 PM

Originally Posted By: Gary D.

And the concept or "rootless" chords is important to me, but often people will insist calling something like E G C#, technically a C#dim chord, as a VIIdim in some key rather than a rootless V7 in some key.

Yes, indeed.

OK, I've followed through the harmonic analysis. Also I have looked at this thematically and I see the thematic germs and how they are repeated and dressed up. The germs I see are the descending arpeggio e.g. m.1 and the descending consecutive notes in pairs of eighth notes (or a quarter note to round it off) e.g. m.5. These are sometimes expanded, altered, or played ascending.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/22/1204:25 AM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Originally Posted By: Gary D.

And the concept or "rootless" chords is important to me, but often people will insist calling something like E G C#, technically a C#dim chord, as a VIIdim in some key rather than a rootless V7 in some key.

Yes, indeed.

OK, I've followed through the harmonic analysis. Also I have looked at this thematically and I see the thematic germs and how they are repeated and dressed up. The germs I see are the descending arpeggio e.g. m.1 and the descending consecutive notes in pairs of eighth notes (or a quarter note to round it off) e.g. m.5. These are sometimes expanded, altered, or played ascending.

To me the most important concepts about "dominance" are these:

1) Any key has a V chord, and regardless of whether the key is major or minor, that V chord remains the same – such as G in the key of C major or C minor.

2) The best way to describe what composers do is to learn a V7b9 chord, in all keys, ASAP because it contains:

a) The V chordb) The V7 chordc) The VIIdim7 chordd) The VIIdim chord (three notes)e) What can be considered a “rootless” VIIdim7 chord, example being D F Ab, also a IIdim, in the key of C minor.

3) Once this is understood, it becomes immediately obvious that all the above chords in any key, expressed with letters or RNs, FUNCTION either as a V chord or in PLACE of a V chord.

4) It also becomes obvious that our VIIdim7 chord is often incomplete while still EXPESSING the full chord, and that happens with things like this: Bb Db E.

Yesterday one of my adult students was completely disoriented by Bb Db E, a Bbdim chord, with an F bass. The bass note was a pedal tone.

The key was F minor, and it kept resolving to Fm. But the solution here is that when you attempt to stack those notes, you get E ___ Bb Db. Obviously there is a hole. The logical missing note is G, and the moment you see that, you realize you have a VIIdim7 chord, Edim7 when stacked, with a note missing. A strong ear player will just know that the dim chord is going to Fm and will not need to see the music. But a student who is not as strong in hearing – yet – may still be able to see VISUALLY where the chord must go because of spelling. And that same student will say, it looks like any old dim chord, three notes, but the spelling tells me that it is more like the FOUR-note chord with a note missing – so the odds of it resolving to F or Fm are very very VERY high!

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/22/1207:37 AM

All of these chords employ the 7-8 leading note effect and/or the D-Ab tritone resolution as well as the 2-1 tail end of the 3-2-1 or stronger 5-4-3-2-1 sequence.

The tritone tends to happen unexpectedly and creates tension that has to be resolved but the 7-8 effect and the descent to tonic can be 'set-up' melodically, especially from the dominant, and anticipated. This drives music forwards.

This is what Clementi is doing from M5-12 and M40-48.

Thanks for correcting my chords, Gary. How careless of me! So this is a final cadence after all at 48. I guess my unsatisfied feeling is because we're in dominant rather than tonic.

It's great to have other eyes and ears. This is why joint analysis is so good. We can all walk away with a stronger and more correct idea of the piece of music in question and the musical language in general.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/22/1209:38 AM

Bb Db E: because of how I learned dim and dim7 chords, as VII dim and VIIdim7 in a key, the way I process this for naming it is: I see the neighboring D and E letters. That suggests a type of 7 chord based on E. I visualize the keyboard and see three halfsteps from Db to E, hence a dim7 chord. I check out the notes of Edim7: E G Bb Db. Yup, that's what I have, with G missing. Then I would label it Edim7/Bb = Bbdim7. Because Edim7 makes it a stack of thirds, I would expect the next chord to be Fm or maybe F.

I would detect the F as a pedal because D E F are three consecutive letter, hence unlikely to be part of one chord name. I might get hung up for a while trying to make Db and F be the parts of the chord and E the odd man out.

This is for labeling the chord. Reading/playing, I don't process anything like this and would just see notes and have no expectations about what comes next. Sometime maybe I'll try to work on this but having expectations about what comes next, apart from just looking ahead, is so completely outside of my sight-reading that I don't even know how I'd practice it. Currently when I try to improve my sight-reading, I focus on two things: looking ahead more, and processing chords more as patterns rather than reading each note.

Not saying how I do any of this is necessarily the best model; just describing it as a picture of how I approach these things.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/22/1201:19 PM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Bb Db E: because of how I learned dim and dim7 chords, as VII dim and VIIdim7 in a key, the way I process this for naming it is: I see the neighboring D and E letters. That suggests a type of 7 chord based on E. I visualize the keyboard and see three halfsteps from Db to E, hence a dim7 chord. I check out the notes of Edim7: E G Bb Db. Yup, that's what I have, with G missing. Then I would label it Edim7/Bb = Bbdim7. Because Edim7 makes it a stack of thirds, I would expect the next chord to be Fm or maybe F.

And you would be exactly on track. I expect the notes to “slither”, this way:

E---FDb-->CBb-->A or Ab

Notationally the letter movement is the clue. For the same reason, this would suggest something different:

E-->F#C#-->D or D#A#-->B

Doing it your way, you build the dim7 chord that is most logical, and that would be A#dim7, in this case truly stacked. But when you get three notes like that, you can stack it in both directions:

F# A# C# E G, which AGAIN leads to a 7b9 chord – F#7b9.

Quote:

I would detect the F as a pedal because D E F are three consecutive letter, hence unlikely to be part of one chord name. I might get hung up for a while trying to make Db and F be the parts of the chord and E the odd man out.

In this particular case the music is divided between the hands this way, LH//RH:

My student was totally thrown because she saw that the LH clearly has a Bbm chord, and she assumed that THIS was the key clue. In fact, the top two notes, Bb and Db are part of the dim chord, and the F is the pedal. This is NOT obvious to students!!!

Quote:

This is for labeling the chord. Reading/playing, I don't process anything like this and would just see notes and have no expectations about what comes next. Sometime maybe I'll try to work on this but having expectations about what comes next, apart from just looking ahead, is so completely outside of my sight-reading that I don't even know how I'd practice it. Currently when I try to improve my sight-reading, I focus on two things: looking ahead more, and processing chords more as patterns rather than reading each note.

Here is what will happen. As you play the dim chord, gradually (over time) you will have a feeling of “not complete”. It is very rare in tonal music to end on a dim chord, and the music will indicate that something unusual is going on, such as here:

You can probably find this on YouTube. When it ends you should have a feeling of being up in the air. So the first step is a feeling of “this needs to go SOMEWHERE ELSE”, a feeling of suspense. Knowing exactly where such a chord should go to, without seeing notation, is really quite advanced, I think.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/22/1201:52 PM

Looking at it in context, I would have been thrown by that F Bb Db E too, and probably come up with an extremely unsatisfactory IVm with a non-chordal leading tone. Ick. Nice example; hopefully I will remember this in my bag of tricks when I next meet something like it.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/23/1205:33 PM

You're very welcome to join in, LadyChen.

Antecedence/consequence is not really to do with cadences but yes, it's very much like question and answer. It's about balance in the phrasing, the first two measures are balanced by the the next two and so on.

Don't let the jargon bother you and don't hesitate to ask questions.

We're about to move on to the third movement of Clementi's third sonatina but past material is always still current if there's anything we've covered that you need clarifying or want to ask more questions about.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/23/1206:14 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Antecedence/consequence is not really to do with cadences but yes, it's very much like question and answer. It's about balance in the phrasing, the first two measures are balanced by the the next two and so on.

Don't let the jargon bother you and don't hesitate to ask questions.

I've seen the term used numerous times too. I am afraid that any jargon that I'm not familiar with bothers me too, because anyone who doesn't know what the terms mean is then left out of the discussion.

I think that what you're talking about is a classical and simple structure which in its simplest level happens over 8 measures in two groups of four.

Measure 1 & measure 2 will build a phrase that (in simple form) will ** often **(1) end with an imperfect cadence such as I-V, IV-V etc., and the final melody note tends not to end on the tonic. You have the feeling of incompletion: hence the "question" part of "question-answer". Measures 3&4 will be similar to the first two, so you feel a relationship, and it typically ends in a perfect cadence of V-I.

Measures 5-8 will have the same 2+2 structure and it feels related to the first. So it's like [(call-answer)(call-answer)] where the 8 together have the feeling of a unit. The whole thing tends to be called a phrase. This whole grouping is called a period. The first "call-answer" is the antecedent, and the second "call-answer" is the consequent. I'm thinking that the general idea of a unit that we can hear and feel might be a good start. Maybe sticking with "phrase groups" is a good start with anyone unfamiliar with the other terms. (I studied phrase groups. I know what ant. & cons. are, but haven't worked with them as such).

(1) I have added the word "often" because while that's how it was presented in my theory, in real music it's not a steady pattern. The sample that I found afterward does not have this, but it does have the imperfect (ending in V) cadence at the end of the first phrase group ("antecedent")

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/23/1206:25 PM

Even "question and answer" is jargon -- or at least terms someone might not understand what it means musically -- as illustrated by the fact that you've just felt that it would be useful to explain it.

In your explanation you used another term "imperfect cadence" and suggested that I-V and IV-V are examples of imperfect cadence. But that doesn't define "imperfect cadence", so even as you speak against technical terms, you are using them. Either we have to try to remember to explain every single term we use, which I think is unwieldy, or we have to trust that people will be willing to ask questions when they don't know something.

I don't think it's possible to make any thread a jargon-free zone, because what's obvious natural language to one person is going to be jargon to another person who doesn't know the definition yet, or even if they do know the definition, they may not have the experience to work with that concept as quickly and broadly as others do with more experience.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/23/1206:42 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/23/1207:40 PM

I've transcribed an illustration in a textbook that was passed on to me that explains "antecedent" and "consequent". The markings are my own. Measures 1 & 2, then 3 & 4 are little mini-units by themselves (name?), and together they form one phrase, or phrase group. The ending hangs in the air so it has this complete / not-complete feeling like a question has. Measures 5 - 8 (each time starting at the pickup) has a parallel structure. The ending definitely sounds complete. Fwiw, the whole thing is called a "period".

Some explanations from the text:- The period consists of a grouping of phrases which ends with an impression of closure. I'm seeing it as a paragraph that introduces, explains, and then concludes an idea. The phrases would be like sentences in that paragraph.- The book uses the word "interact" which is cool, because all the things going on in the music work together to give an overall impression.

This is the start of "The Wild Rider" from Schumann's Album for the Young, Op. 58, No. 8

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/23/1210:17 PM

OK, I tried googling (and wikipedia immediately gave me far more than I have ever been able to absorb about cadences), but I can't find "open cadence". What do you mean by closed cadence and open cadence? What do you mean by cadence?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/23/1210:52 PM

Wikipedia actually gives a decent definition of a cadence:

Quote:

In Western musical theory, a cadence (Latin cadentia, "a falling") is, "a melodic or harmonic configuration that creates a sense of repose or resolution [finality or pause]."[1] A harmonic cadence is a progression of (at least) two chords that concludes a phrase, section, or piece of music.[2] A rhythmic cadence is a characteristic rhythmic pattern indicating the end of a phrase.[3] Cadences give phrases a distinctive ending that can, for example, indicate to the listener whether the piece is to be continued or concluded. An analogy may be made with punctuation,[4] with some weaker cadences acting as commas that indicate a pause or momentary rest, while a stronger cadence acts as a period that signals the end of the phrase or sentence. A cadence is labeled more or less "weak" or "strong" depending on the sense of finality it creates. While cadences are usually classified by specific chord or melodic progressions, the use of such progressions does not necessarily constitute a cadence—there must be a sense of closure, as at the end of a phrase. Harmonic rhythm plays an important part in determining where a cadence occurs.

A closed cadence sounds complete -- V-I is an example. It closes on the tonic, giving it a sound of completion or closure. An open cadence doesn't end on the tonic. Keystring gave the examples of IV-V or I-V above. In those examples, the dominant (V) chord leaves the phrase sounding incomplete, like something must follow it. This is why these phrases are sometimes called Question phrases, and the phrase that follows often has a closed cadence, making it an Answer phrase.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/23/1210:57 PM

Thanks, Lady Chen.

Is V-I or V7-I the only example of a closed cadence? Can other pairs or sequences of chords sound complete? (I just remembered plagal: IV-I. Is that also a closed cadence?) Does a closed cadence have to end on I?

Is ending on V the only open cadence, or can you end on any chord (other than I) and still have an open cadence?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/23/1211:14 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/23/1211:34 PM

OK, thank you. Whenever I have tried to learn about cadences, there's always way more information than I can absorb -- and of course I try to absorb it all -- so it's nice to get this as a little package of information I can remember and look for: closed I, open V.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/24/1203:58 AM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Even "question and answer" is jargon -- or at least terms someone might not understand what it means musically -- as illustrated by the fact that you've just felt that it would be useful to explain it.

In your explanation you used another term "imperfect cadence" and suggested that I-V and IV-V are examples of imperfect cadence. But that doesn't define "imperfect cadence", so even as you speak against technical terms, you are using them.

I wrote my feelings about jargon, rather than speaking out against them, and I immediately went to explaining the terminology, and then wrote another post with a concrete example.

Quote:

Either we have to try to remember to explain every single term we use, which I think is unwieldy, ...

If this series of threads is a general exploration on a topic in the way that forum threads usually are, then possibly yes. But my understanding is that this thread was set up for the purpose of teaching. When I teach, I do set up the concepts and terms behind the concepts. I don't know if it is unwieldy. I tend to think it is necessary. It is very possible that Richard did explain "antecedent / consequent" at some point, and that it's buried. It seemed like a good idea to get a definition out there, so I did.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/24/1204:08 AM

Adding to Lady Chen's explanation, which is the same as what I understand, there is a broader overall concept of cadence as being where the music pauses or ends. The cadence is also indicated by a change in rhythm and other clues that make us feel the pause or ending.

Perfect cadences, as LC said, indicate a completion, which is why they end on I. When the music finishes, it logically ends on the tonic and the tonic chord. At the very end of the piece, your final note in the melody will also tend to be the tonic note. In the middle, you may have a V-I, but in C major, your melody note might be E (3), which makes you feel the music wants to still go on.

Imperfect cadences are the pause, and they tend to end on V. You can have I-V, IV-V and also some other combinations, but these are the most common.

There is another interesting cadence called "deceptive", which is the V-vi. It is "deceptive" because you have the feeling that it has ended, but it hasn't. There is a reason for this. Consider this in the key of C major. I is CEG. vi is ACE. They both share the notes CE. You can have the soprano note land on C so your mind says "Ah, it's finished!". You hear the E with it, and you still have this feeling of a I-chord. But the final chord is minor, which is not the sound of the I chord, and the bass has not leaped a solid fifth or fourth from G to C (down or up). Instead it climbs a measly whole step from G to A, which negates that impression of finality.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/24/1204:12 AM

It may be an over-generalization, but I'm thinking that antecedent phrases end with an open cadence and consequent phrases end with a closed cadence.

I'm glad to know what they call it in your neck of the woods. When it comes to the sub-phrase, different sources give different names, with a couple of them saying "We don't really have a name for this that everyone can agree on, so let's call it (some name)." As a result, I've ended up with this "nameless two-measure thingy" which is less than satisfying. I like "sub-phrase.

Quote:

It may be an over-generalization, but I'm thinking that antecedent phrases end with an open cadence and consequent phrases end with a closed cadence

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/24/1211:53 AM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

What to expect?

The final movement is likely to be fast but not as intellectually engaging as a sonata form movement. The middle movement should present a gentler contrast usually with a change of key but don't expect much modulation.

..

There shouldn't be any exposition, development and recapitulation in the sense of a sonata form movement but you are likely to see a simple ABA form where the middle will be a contrast to the beginning and end. In Haydn's sonata the double bar in the menuet signalled a binary form movement rather than sonata form.

For the sonatina to have unity there should be an overlap of material but it's more likely in the outer movements.

But I'm not Clementi.

There may be nothing more than that he felt the movements went well together or that he composed them on the same day or after listening to the same jingle on his local radio station.

Movement 3: Allegro, C Major

A - M1 - M16

All the content here is based on exposition from first movement.

B - M17 - M42

Some of the content here is founded from the development of movement 1 (M31-M42.) Move to G Major at M23

A - M43 - 60 C Major

A - M61 - END C Major

This is how I hear it, but not sure if it makes sense. Perhaps just A B A.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/24/1212:12 PM

Originally Posted By: keystring

Perfect cadences, as LC said, indicate a completion, which is why they end on I.[...]Imperfect cadences are the pause, and they tend to end on V. You can have I-V, IV-V and also some other combinations, but these are the most common.[...]There is another interesting cadence called "deceptive", which is the V-vi. It is "deceptive" because you have the feeling that it has ended, but it hasn't.

Is "perfect cadence" the same as "closed cadence"? Is "imperfect cadence" the same as "open cadence"?

Is "deceptive cadence" only V-vi? Or is it more generally V-<anything but I>?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/24/1212:20 PM

I haven't defined antecedence and consequence. I have always used them in their English sense rather than in a specifically musical definition - I hadn't realised the terms had been so precisely defined other than that THE antecedent was the subject of a canon. I think I may stop using the terms and find some other non-musically specific phraseology like 'balancing half' or some such.

Cadences as I understand them are:a final cadence ends on tonic: V-I perfect; IV-I plagalan imperfect cadence ends on dominant (usually from I, II or IV)an interrupted cadence moves from dominant to something other than tonic, usually VI.

From this I would understand a closed cadence (?-I) and an open cadence (?-V).

This doesn't concur with Wiki which made it look like rocket science and calls an imperfect cadence a half-cadence. I'm not at all sure what it defines an imperfect cadence as.

I may stop using these terms as well and again find a simple English phraseology such as inconclusive or unfinished. I'd rather call it a V-VI or a I-V cadence and let the ear give it a definition.

The more I learn, the more I realise how little I know...and how much less I care.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/24/1212:28 PM

In my readings about cadence over the years, the only thing I have concluded is there's an awful lot of terminology, not everyone agrees on the terms, and different people use the same terms for different things. I don't mind using the different cadence terms in this thread, but they'll need clarifying so we can all understand each other.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/24/1212:35 PM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Is "perfect cadence" the same as "closed cadence"? Is "imperfect cadence" the same as "open cadence"?

"Closed" implies finality - the music or the section is completely finished. If you have V-I as cadence, then your last chord is the tonic chord and that would suggest that the music is finished. You'll notice however when you're singing, that the main melody (usually soprano part) will also end on the tonic note. I.e. if the music is in C major, you will probably end on C in the melody at the end of a song.

In a V-I cadence, the melody might also end on E or G. This does not have a totally complete feeling. Often the music goes on. For example, this could happen in an ABA (ternary) music where it's going to modulate to the dominant and keep going, or where the music is changing direction otherwise. The composer lets you feel that this section of music is done, but the music itself is not done. In this case the cadence is referred to as semi-closed.

So to answer the first part of the question: the V-I cadence is closed or semi-closed. There are other names to this such as "authentic perfect" - the main idea is that a cadence can have an absolute finality to it because the melody ends on the tonic note, and the chord is the I chord; or it can have a more ambiguous finality.

The I-V, IV-V etc. cadences, i.e. cadences ending on V, cannot be closed cadences since the very nature of the V precludes the idea of finality.

Quote:

Is "deceptive cadence" only V-vi? Or is it more generally V-<anything but I>?

Afaik, it's only V-vi. The vi chord is so close to I since it shares two of the notes, that it creates the temporary illusion of "finishing", and then doesn't. I think a V-vi would also allow us to slip into the relative minor rather suddenly for a modulation.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/24/1202:52 PM

Originally Posted By: keystring

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Is "perfect cadence" the same as "closed cadence"? Is "imperfect cadence" the same as "open cadence"?

"Closed" implies finality - the music or the section is completely finished. If you have V-I as cadence, then your last chord is the tonic chord and that would suggest that the music is finished. You'll notice however when you're singing, that the main melody (usually soprano part) will also end on the tonic note. I.e. if the music is in C major, you will probably end on C in the melody at the end of a song.

In a V-I cadence, the melody might also end on E or G. This does not have a totally complete feeling. Often the music goes on. For example, this could happen in an ABA (ternary) music where it's going to modulate to the dominant and keep going, or where the music is changing direction otherwise. The composer lets you feel that this section of music is done, but the music itself is not done. In this case the cadence is referred to as semi-closed.

So to answer the first part of the question: the V-I cadence is closed or semi-closed. There are other names to this such as "authentic perfect" - the main idea is that a cadence can have an absolute finality to it because the melody ends on the tonic note, and the chord is the I chord; or it can have a more ambiguous finality.

The I-V, IV-V etc. cadences, i.e. cadences ending on V, cannot be closed cadences since the very nature of the V precludes the idea of finality.

Quote:

Is "deceptive cadence" only V-vi? Or is it more generally V-<anything but I>?

Afaik, it's only V-vi. The vi chord is so close to I since it shares two of the notes, that it creates the temporary illusion of "finishing", and then doesn't. I think a V-vi would also allow us to slip into the relative minor rather suddenly for a modulation.

Another view, completely skipping these terms which I can never remember to save my life.

Any move that sounds like IV to I sounds more gentle to me, and since C to G in the key of C, I to V, has the same sound as IV to I in the key of G, where C becomes the IV chord, it has a “backwards around the circle of 5ths sound”. By backwards, I mean that music naturally wants to go counter-clockwise, C to G to D, etc.

So in the key of C, D to G is much stronger, often D7 to G, also called V or V7 of V.

So the first principle to me is about what is strongest. Now, for obvious reasons, you can also go I V I or C G C, so in the end the only thing of importance to me is what the final chord is in a key section. If it is not I, it is not final. Things are up in the air.

Very soon there are more names than I can track, so you can take all of this with a HUGE does of salt.

Deceptive cadence is another term that drives me buggy. It is used formally for a V to vi move, but logically to me ANY chord that V goes to that is not I is deceptive.

I think you have to decide which of these terms you need to communicate with other people. I find myself using them now and then simply because I am talking to people who know them can can’t follow me unless I use them!

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/24/1211:02 PM

The thing to do if the key is unclear is to look at what chords are being used. This might give a better idea of what's going on.

Right. Forgot about the chords. Haven't really looked at chords much since the Moonlight. Will get on this in the AM.

side note: you were right about the small sectioning and perfecting on the Bach piece. What a difference it is making in getting this in much better shape faster. Trouble spot is going to be M33-M40 (I can see it coming) and will take some extra time with this.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/24/1211:54 PM

I'm looking at the Development, and mm. 38 - 47 within that part. Like Jeff says, it moves into the key of Dm briefly. Eventually it wants to go back to F major for the recapitulation. So mm. 38 - 47 are the transition to bring us back from Dm to F major.

m. 38 I hear it becoming D7 at the end. I can hear beats 1 & 2 as F#o7-b9. The b9 (Eb) resolves to become D. A diminished chord often suggests an invisible root that would make it a V of something, and the F#o part could be the top half of D7. Another way of looking at it is that a fully diminished 7 often wants to move to the chord that is a half step above, cadence-like. Here: F# to G. In fact, the next chord becomes a Gm. So the whole thing from m. 38 - 39 suggests D7 to Gm, or F#dim7 => D7 => Gm.

In m. 39 the C and A are dancing around the Bb which appears at the end. So I see this as becoming Gm.

mm. 40 & 41 do the same thing as the previous two measures: Eo7-b9 becoming C7, resolving to F. Again, the Bb and G dance around the A before it appears in m. 40.

Measure 42 is a very emphatic G7. We can expect that C major or C minor will probably be there next, and of course C is the dominant of F, which in sonata form is the key we know we have to have for the recapitulation.

Mm. 43 & 44, the whole thing centers around C (major chord) but the other notes make me feel hints of F or Dm, like it's teasing us about where it's going to go. I wasn't sure what to call beats 2 and 3. Dm/C? Csus42 that's missing the G we'd need?

Measure 45 is a very solid C7 and then we're home free to get back to F major in the Recapitulation.

So it's like there are V-I movements there (I don't know if they would be called cadences, though), but they are subtle. I see a general movement starting at 38 of D7 => Gm => D => F, then G7 = C and C7 bringing us back to the key of F major.

I remember reading that sonata form often has a section which is a transition into new keys, which can be relatively lengthy.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/24/1211:57 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

M38-47 are without cadence so you can make a call on the key.

This is what made me want to look, and now it seems I'm hooked on the piece. Richard, I wondered when you wrote "cadence", because I understand a cadence to be what comes at the end of a section to signify a pause or end. I am wondering whether you are referring to cadence, or to V-I pairs which are often used to establish tonality? If the latter, then I understand what you wrote.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/25/1206:44 AM

Quoting myself since I know more:

Originally Posted By: keystring

Mm. 43 & 44, the whole thing centers around C (major chord) but the other notes make me feel hints of F or Dm, like it's teasing us about where it's going to go. I wasn't sure what to call beats 2 and 3. Dm/C? Csus42 that's missing the G we'd need?.

What we actually have is m. 43 C to Dm7/C in beat 3; m. 44 C to F/C beat 3.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/25/1209:00 AM

We have exactly the same thing going on here as we had in the last sonatina, i.e. using rootless dominant 7b9's and this time delaying the clarification of the resulting chord using sus4 and sus2's.

In M38-47 we're passing through keys rather than settling on or in them. We are modulating from D minor to a short dominant pedal/preparation passage ready for the return to tonic.

Your analysis is more thorough than mine, keystring, and better finished. I hadn't got as far as naming the chords in M43-44 (as is my wont ) but you've shown how he's effecting this 'cool' transition.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/25/1204:54 PM

We have exactly the same thing going on here as we had in the last sonatina, i.e. using rootless dominant 7b9's and this time delaying the clarification of the resulting chord using sus4 and sus2's.

Like C7b9/E without the C? It makes it kind of tricky to figure out what it is, or what we should call it for understanding the progression. At any rate, happy to know we are just visiting on our way back to F major.

Thanks for doing my homework for me KS. It took me the longest time to figure out what you were referring to by F# in M38. Then realized the treble clef in left hand . There I go again thinking it can't be me. Reminds me of this story. I know we aren't supposed to text while driving (at least in Canada,) but this guy has bigger problems.

Wife text to Husband: Be careful driving home tonight, honey. I just heard on the radio that some lunatic is driving the wrong way on the Don Valley Parkway.

Husband text to Wife: What to you mean, some lunatic? There's not just one, there's 100's of them.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/25/1205:26 PM

I find the chords and progressions easier to figure out if, instead of looking for a rootless V7b9, I just notice the nice rooted VIIdim7 chords. This is useful to me because I know that VIIdim chords like to go to I or Im chords, just like V chords do. It's easier for me to remember that both VIIdim and V chords like to go to I or Im, than to try to figure out roots that don't even appear in the music.

If required to, I could speak the rootless language, but it would just come about from finding the VIIdim7 to start with, and extrapolating backward to a rootless V7b9 chord, rather than from looking at the music and noticing, hey, C doesn't appear here! I bet it's a type of rootless C chord! (OK, I know, that's probably not how the people who use rootless chords, find them either.)

(I'm using V and VII here just to illustrate; if the music is shifting tonality rapidly with a lot of accidentals I'm probably going to notate it with letter name chords rather than roman numerals.)

The rootless language does allow you to show more things as a type of V-I progression, but it just hasn't grabbed me yet.

This kind of progression (VIIdim to Im) was something I was going to talk about way back in the Bach Prelude in C Major thread, but since I seemed to be in a minority in wanting to do harmonic analysis in that thread, I ended up not bothering. Maybe it would be useful for me to say something about why VIIdim is a good friend to me, on this thread.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/25/1205:45 PM

1) Any key has a V chord, and regardless of whether the key is major or minor, that V chord remains the same – such as G in the key of C major or C minor.

2) The best way to describe what composers do is to learn a V7b9 chord, in all keys, ASAP because it contains:

a) The V chordb) The V7 chordc) The VIIdim7 chordd) The VIIdim chord (three notes)e) What can be considered a “rootless” VIIdim7 chord, example being D F Ab, also a IIdim, in the key of C minor.

3) Once this is understood, it becomes immediately obvious that all the above chords in any key, expressed with letters or RNs, FUNCTION either as a V chord or in PLACE of a V chord.

4) It also becomes obvious that our VIIdim7 chord is often incomplete while still EXPESSING the full chord, and that happens with things like this: Bb Db E.

This post of Gary's along with an earlier post that I can't find that said any dim7 chord is a rootless Dom. 7b9

All the chords mentioned in 2) perform the same function as a dominant chord, i.e. lead us to a tonic chord.

In M38 F#dim 7 (no third) is functioning as a rootless D7. And in M40...

Originally Posted By: Greener

Like C7b9/E without the C?

this is E dim 7 (no third) functioning as a rootless C7.

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

This kind of progression (VIIdim to Im) was something I was going to talk about way back in the Bach Prelude in C Major thread, but since I seemed to be in a minority in wanting to do harmonic analysis in that thread, I ended up not bothering. Maybe it would be useful for me to say something about why VIIdim is a good friend to me, on this thread.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/25/1205:59 PM

There is often more than one way of seeing things in music. For example, Richard talked about sus chords where I talked about Dm7/C. These are two ways of looking at it, and both are correct. The same is true about "rootless flat nine chords" versus a fully diminished chord, versus VIIo7. It is good to have these choices. We may be more comfortable with one way, and if it works for the person, then use that. Or we may be able to see several angles through several views, and that is also useful.

- just seeing "fully diminished" gives us various bits of information- seeing VIIo7 lets us know where that chord is going to go. If you see F#dim7, then you know that F# is the leading note (7) of G, and it gets you there.- seeing "rootless flat nine", i.e. F#dim7 suggests D7(b9) makes us feel the V7-I progression. The "flat nine" lets us anticipate the common movement of the b9 which moves down to become D. I'm tempted to write "settle down" rather than "move down", because the Eb sets your teeth on edge, and then the D is "ah, relief!".

Hearing, including learning to hear, is also involved in this.

Finally there is also what happens in the entire measure. The end of that measure has a D7. The "rootless flat nine" chord way of seeing things lets us anticipate this settling down. To me it's like the Cheshire cat in Alice in Wonderland, where first you see the grin, and then the cat. But you know when you see the grin, the cat will follow - not anything but that cat.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/25/1206:01 PM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

I find the chords and progressions easier to figure out if, instead of looking for a rootless V7b9, I just notice the nice rooted VIIdim7 chords. This is useful to me because I know that VIIdim chords like to go to I or Im chords, just like V chords do. It's easier for me to remember that both VIIdim and V chords like to go to I or Im, than to try to figure out roots that don't even appear in the music.

There are specific situation where the rootless idea is really powerful, other places where it does not work very well.

If you have F-D moving to E C to F B and back to E C, you have no chords, but you have a chord structure IMPLIED. It works like G7 C G7 C. I'm not showing any possible bass. You don't have enough info to actually show a V or VII chord. It's all context and feel.

For the same reason, when I hear D F B moving to E G C, I don't hear VII moving to I but I hear V7 moving to I. The reason is that although D F B is technically an inversion of B D F, it is VERY close to D F *G* B, which is of course G7/D.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/25/1206:03 PM

[cross-posted -- I was replying to Richard's post]

Yes, I remember that post of Gary's, and it was incredibly useful to me to understanding the rootless idea! I'm just not yet sold on using it in my own analysis yet. (Give it a few months though, I've resisted some other of Gary's ideas that were new to me, and I think I've ended up adopting all of them...!)

I'll try to say something about how I think of VIIdim chords (plus fully diminished and half diminished) either tonight or tomorrow.

Actually, come to think of it, I'd already found a nice result from the rootless idea in the Bach C Major Prelude... so I'm already halfway to adopting it. Eeek. (Gary pointed out the same result on that thread, but I had thought of it on my own too.)

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/25/1206:11 PM

There are specific situation where the rootless idea is really powerful, other places where it does not work very well.

Aw, shoot, and I was going to have fun with adding hypothetical roots all over the place .

Quote:

For the same reason, when I hear D F B moving to E G C, I don't hear VII moving to I but I hear V7 moving to I. The reason is that although D F B is technically an inversion of B D F, it is VERY close to D F *G* B, which is of course G7/D.

See, I don't know what VIIdim to I sounds like, or V7 to I. What I mean is, they both probably sound familiar to me, but not in a way where I can identify "this sounded like V7 to I, but that sounded like V to I, and that other thing sounded like VIIdim to I" and so on. I doubt I can even hear "this sounded different from that other one I heard 8 measures ago" or "these sound the same, just different voicings; while these other ones sound different."

The aural analysis I can do is depressingly limited compared to the paper analysis I can do.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/25/1207:10 PM

Since I believe that playing and hearing are dynamically connected, I still believe that there are many people who have potentially strong aural skills that remain undeveloped because of a combination of:

1) Fear, anxiety, self-consciousness.2) Very very VERY strong reading skills that are not expanded to writing music.

The reason: any kind of composition requires a different focus. There is not longer right and wrong, just what works, or what does not. Once you brain kicks into creative mode, it is free to find things, and new pathways are formed. So if you come up with a tune, or some nice changes, or both, the process of discovering them and/or writing them down just changes the way you hear.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/25/1207:29 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/26/1212:30 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

This kind of progression (VIIdim to Im) was something I was going to talk about way back in the Bach Prelude in C Major thread, but since I seemed to be in a minority in wanting to do harmonic analysis in that thread, I ended up not bothering. Maybe it would be useful for me to say something about why VIIdim is a good friend to me, on this thread.

I think it would be useful.

I would also be interested to understand more about this, PS88. To be honest, there has been so much new information for me to absorb that I have not given much consideration to RN analysis. Know what it is/does, but that is about it.

There has been a lot to say about this movement. Great stuff. Also, great to see LadyChen joining the discussion, and hope still with us.

Moving right along: Hope not too basic for some here, but this is more on what I have to say about the recap. before we move along to next movement;

M48-M51 = M1-M4M52-M55 = M13-M16 (2/3 of M16)

M56-M57 - I believe this is coming from development, but can not say for sure where.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/26/1212:53 PM

Originally Posted By: Greener

Also, great to see LadyChen joining the discussion, and hope still with us.

I'm still here! I work during the day, so I won't be doing any score analysis during the week, but on the weekends I'll be able to participate more with a score in front of me. For now, I'm enjoying the conversation!

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/26/1201:14 PM

OK, here's how I normally think about diminished chords. I'm going to present this in a few separate posts, leading up to dim7 chords at the end. This is essentially how I learned it in my music theory class. I've learned a lot of other stuff since then, but these form my basics.

This assumes that you know major and minor scales (or how to figure them out) and that you're comfortable with naming intervals and chords. If you have questions about those, please ask. I'm just pointing out the assumption because I'm going to start this series of posts assuming scales, intervals, and chord names, and then backtrack if needed.

Chords in a major scale

Take a major scale, and form the triad and seventh chords on each note in the scale, just using notes in the scale. For example, working in the key of F major:

The only dominant seventh chord is V7. (A "dominant seventh" chord is a major triad with a minor seventh added.)

The only diminished triad is VIIdim.

The only half-diminished chord is VIIm7b5. (A "half-diminished" chord is a diminished triad (root, minor third, diminished fifth) with a minor seventh added. We'll meet its cousin the "fully-diminished" chord when we get to minor scales.)

Exercises that may help:

A. Try this out in various keys. Build the chords at the piano, listen to them, name them. Do it in at least two ways: (1) pick a key. Build (play/listen/name) all the triads and seventh chords. (2) pick a roman numeral and build the corresponding triad and seventh chord in all major keys (for example, pick VII, and build VIIdim and VIIm7b5 in all major keys. Or at least several keys.)

B. Take some music in a major key, and identify a section without accidentals. Label all the chords, and see how often they fit into the pattern of one of the triads or types of seventh chords described here.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/26/1201:51 PM

I should say that my music theory course was based on tonal music of the Baroque and Classical eras, and the examples we used were generally cherry-picked to show certain kinds of examples of the use of harmony. So what I'm laying out is not a complete story for all kinds of music, and not even the complete story for Baroque and Classical music, and not even the complete story of everything I learned in the course. Primarily, this is the material we focussed on as fundamentals in the first three weeks of the course, to prepare us for the rest of the semester.

OK, on to the next part.

Resolution in a major key

After analysing a lot of music, we started to notice very frequently a V-I or V7-I progression, or a IIm-V7-I progression, or even longer chains, for example IIIm-VIm-IIm-V7-I. All of these have the chord roots moving down by a fifth ("down" logically speaking: as actually used, the roots might move down a fifth, or up a fourth, or down a twelfth, etc.) For example, IIIm-VIm-IIm-V7-I in the key of F major is Am Dm Gm C7 F.

I want to look particularly at C7 to F. C7 (C E G Bb) contains a tritone: E-Bb. This is an unstable and dissonant interval (at least, I'm told that it sounds unstable: sometimes it sounds dissonant to me, and sometimes it just sounds interesting), and when moving between chords from C7 to F, it resolves "inwards": from E-Bb to F-A. What I understand is that this is part of why the V7-I resolution sounds so satisfying: because of the dissonant tritone moving by half-steps to the nice consonant major third in the tonic chord.

Slight change of pace: Let's look at Edim. Edim (E G Bb) contains that same tritone: E-Bb. So moving from Edim to F should provide a similar sense of relaxation or arrival of the dissonant tritone to the major third in the tonic chord. So VIIdim to I might be something we would also expect to see.

Similarly with the half-diminished chord, Em7b5 (E G Bb D). That also contains the tritone E-Bb, and again we might expect that Em7b5 to F should give a sense of relaxation or arrival. This is VIIm7b5 to I.

I don't normally do the following, but it has come up, and others do use it, so I'll mention it here: If we happen to decide to look at the chord C9 (C E G Bb D), we will see all the notes of C7, Edim, and Em7b5 in there. So we can call Edim a rootless C7 chord, and Em7b5 a rootless C9 chord. Then we can see VIIdim to I as a type of V7 to I, just with a rootless V7. And we can see VIIm7b5 to I as a type of V7, just with a rootless V7 that's been jazzed up to a rootless V9.

Without using accidentals, there is only one tritone in a major key: between the fourth and seventh notes of the scale. For example, in F major, between Bb and E. A tritone inverts to a tritone, so B-Eb and Eb-B are both tritones. Because there's only one tritone, this kind of "resolve the dissonant tritone" game can only be played around this one place in the scale. At least, without using extra accidentals.

There are other directions tritones can be resolved to, and other chords they can resolve to. But for now I want to just emphasize this basic pattern of V7-I, VIIdim-I, and VIIm7b5-I.

Exercises which might help:

A. Pick a major key. Try out the V7-I, VIIdim-I, and VII7b5-I progressions. Experiment with different voicings. Listen. Try these in other major keys.

B. Verifying that there's only one tritone in a key: pick a key. Go up the scale playing fourths, using only notes from the scale. E.g. in the key of F, play F-Bb, G-C, A-D, etc.Notice that exactly one of the fourths is not a perfect fourth, but is instead an augmented fourth (a.k.a. tritone). Now go up the scale playing fifths, using only notes from the scale (e.g. in the key of F, play F-C, G-D, etc.) Notice that exactly one of the fifths is not a perfect fifth, but is instead a diminished fifth. Can you hear the difference between the fourths and the tritone? Between the fifths and the tritone?

So, these are the only chords that belong in F Major? We will still allow, 9, 11, 13 and + - iterations?

I'm glad you like it! Well, there are oodles of other chords that can be built. For example Fsus2, F6, C9, Bbmaj7(sus2), etc.

But if you restrict yourself to triads and types of seventh chords with note names skipping a letter, yes, these are the only chords of those types using just notes of a major scale. In other words, these are the only types of three- or four-note chords that can be built stacking major and minor thirds using notes from a major scale.

As far as allowing other types of chords: anything's allowed (although some things are more common than others). And once you allow accidentals, the possibilities skyrocket. I'm laying out here what I learned at the start of learning music theory, that starts out with a confined palette: three- or four-note chords, confined to notes of a major scale. And it is cool that there are only a small number of possibilities.

Good job, Jeff. You're looking more closely now and picking out things you wouldn't have when we started.

The exposition consists of two subjects. The first is in tonic and the second in the dominant. You've got the keys already but didn't highlight the two subjects. The second subject begins at M18 and is the core material for the development.

The development uses four measures of M18 (three obvious and one decorated) then it uses the four-note figure from M15-16 to effect a sequence down from F to D, then repeats those last two measures with a slight expansion then begins the transition from D minor to the dominant preparation passage before beginning the recap'n.

What alerts me to a problem in your analysis is the way the measures on the right of the equation are not in numerical order but jump backwards and forwards.

M48-51 = M1-4, yes.M52-53 = M13-14 but in Bb (subdominant, not unexpected)M54-55 = M15 or M16 repeated as a sequence to return to tonic forM56-57 = functionally equvalent to M16 but repeated, I suspect, to balance the bars M58-71 = M17-30, bar for bar but with minor modifications.

The minor modifications such as starting with a rising figure instead of a falling one might be more noteworthy in the development (if it leads anywhere) but is just variation/creativity in the recap'n.

Clementi has not just repeated the first subjects in his sonatinas but has continued to practise his craft. He has been more restrained with the second subjects but hasn't packed up early for lunch as he so easily could have.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/26/1203:48 PM

My next sections leading to "why PS88 loves dim7 chords" will be on chords in a minor key, but it will probably have to wait until tomorrow. Just didn't want you to think major keys are all there is, and wondering what happened to the dim7.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/26/1206:04 PM

Not necessarily. But in the recapitulation it's less likely. The recap should be fairly straightforward.

Originally Posted By: Greener

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

M52-53 = M13-14 but in Bb (subdominant, not unexpected)

Not sure what this means. In exposition we were in C Major and in recap'n, at these measures in G minor, I thought. So, where is Bb coming from.

Yes, you did say G minor and I looked briefly at the score and saw Eb and F# but in M52 the bass is F and A so it's not minor at this point, it's only M55 that touches on G minor. It's only transitional anyway. The important thing is that in the exposition it was in F and now it's not so an extra measure, M55, is thrown in to take us back to F - that's the point, and then a repeat of M56 to balance the measures.

Originally Posted By: Greener

Should have listened to this more, instead of relying on the score.

The better you get at reading the less you feel inclined to actually go to the piano but when the accidentals start getting into the mix it really is worth sitting down at the keyboard and playing through, not just the printed score, but put the bass in root intervals and simple triads to really get a feel for what the composer is doing. But we all do it, Jeff, so don't feel bad!

When you kick yourself for making a beginner's mistake, you've moved on from being a beginner! You really are making progress.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/26/1209:54 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/27/1202:59 AM

About 1st movement...

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Yes, you did say G minor and I looked briefly at the score and saw Eb and F# but in M52 the bass is F and A so it's not minor at this point, it's only M55 that touches on G minor. It's only transitional anyway. The important thing is that in the exposition it was in F and now it's not so an extra measure, M55, is thrown in to take us back to F - that's the point, and then a repeat of M56 to balance the measures.

I have not read this whole thread, so if I am repeating what you have already said, my apologies to everyone.

More than anything else I sense V to I movements, in any key. One “trick” that countless composers use is to take a I chord in a key – in this case F (the chord) at the a tempo – then make it into a dom7 chord. Immediately we hear F7 in M52 just begging to go to Bb, which it does, and we can call it our “new key”, modulation, or secondary dominance, whatever big terms we wish. I call it “just visiting a key”. It’s like a very quick detour, interesting, then the composer goes to a new V and ends up on a new I. So in M55 he dances around a D7, to Gm (another V to I movement), then in M56 with a C7 he takes us right back to F, the key of the movement.

The reason I think this is so important is that in more difficult or more adventuresome music, these continual “jumps” to a new V7 in some other key can go on forever almost. And the only thing that links it all together if we do not use a million rules is that it sounds cool.

Quote:

The better you get at reading the less you feel inclined to actually go to the piano but when the accidentals start getting into the mix it really is worth sitting down at the keyboard and playing through, not just the printed score, but put the bass in root intervals and simple triads to really get a feel for what the composer is doing. But we all do it, Jeff, so don't feel bad!

Just looking at a score and hearing it in your head is “audiation”, and it’s one of those “fancy words” that I never heard until coming to this forum. You can’t ever predict how good people will get at it, but I know from experience that it never stops developing. I can hear something like this as clearly in my head as if I were playing every note. But sooner or later I run into something so unusual or so complex that I stop hearing it all, and then I have to go to the piano to get the rest of it. When I was young, I didn’t hear anything in my head. It develops with experience and time.

Quote:

When you kick yourself for making a beginner's mistake, you've moved on from being a beginner! You really are making progress.

I’ve made several over the last few years while working through music with advanced students. When I scan music, hearing it, and I have never looked at it before, I make the same stupid mistakes I made decades ago. The only thing that has changed is my ratio of correct answers to goofs.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/27/1203:21 AM

In the A's (first A for example) I would call M1-M4 Antecedent, M5-M8 Consequent, M9-12 Antecedent, M13-M16 Consequent.

I hear this, without the terms: M1-8 states something, but it ends in a question. M8 ends on F, a V chord.

Then M9-16 are more like an answer, with M16 completing a section.

Important to me would be that M1-4 keeps the Bb tonal center, but M9-12 not only varies 1-4 but also finds a way to end on Cm/Eb. I don’t much care for Roman numerals, but there is a sort of ambiguity between a II and a IV chord, in this manner.

Key of Bb:

I = BbIV = Eb, II (or ii or IIm) = CmV = F

If we consider II and IV as interchangeable, we tend to see the important chords in any key that a composer uses to weave music around.

When I do this kind of analysis with students – form – I tend to use shapes and diagrams rather than names. I’m interested in how people who use antecedent and consequence would apply them hear.

My gut says 1-8 for antecedent, 9-16 for consequence. But I’m not sure. These are still new terms for me.

Quote:

Perhaps we are moving through D Minor in second phrase of B (M21-M26,) but back to Bb major by M27.

I hear it this way:

M21, Edim7b5 to FM22, “C#dim7” to DmM23, Gm, to C7

When I put a chord in quotes, it means for me that a note is missing. There is only C# G Bb, but we can sense that the E could be there – C# E G Bb.

In M24 we expect Bb, but he delays, going to Dm. This would be a deceptive cadence in F major, a V7 chord (C7) going to Dm (VI), then after that he settles down to F, in 26, but then he makes us hear that F chord as a V because he is taking us back to Bb in the next measure.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/27/1205:42 AM

I have not read this whole thread, so if I am repeating what you have already said, my apologies to everyone.

You are not repeating anything we've said, Gary, but the more you repeat what you've said here the sooner we'll start to see it ourselves.

Originally Posted By: Greener

Perhaps we are moving through D Minor in second phrase of B (M21-M26,) but back to Bb major by M27.

Did you use the piano to determine this? If not, do so now (or after re-reading the discussion of the development sections of the opening movements of this and the previous sonatina). Again, when in doubt about the key look first at the bass and then at the chords.

Looking back at keystring's use of antecedence/consequence I think that antecedence should end on a dominant chord and the consequence on a tonic. That makes the antecedence M1-8 and the consequence M8-16, and A is consequentially ( ) M1-16. So back to ABA.

Note the use of the subdominant key to tone down the mood in this movement as he did in 1 and 2. In 3 he went to the dominant. Haydn stayed in the one key throughout as Bach did in the suites. (Haydn's sonata was written much earlier.)

The first 8 measures, and more so the filled out version M35-42, have such a strong correlation to the first 8 measures of the Con spirito and the introductory notes of the B phrase (M17) so resemble M7 while the M18 figure is lifted from the second subject at M13. The end of B, M21-26, is reminiscent of the transition phase of the development, M38-47.

In the reprise of A he adds decoration and splits the thirds, etc. into separate notes. The final bars rely on the M17 figure leading back to the M15/16 cadence.

I started this before I went off for breakfast. I see, Gary, you have since posted (it was a long breakfast ). There is some overlap.

I thought you were being humorous yesterday! Yes, that's precisely how it will help determine key. I thought we covered that back with the Moonlight - it must have slipped through with the furore of cross posting.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/27/1210:57 AM

If you take a major scale and build a triad on any of it's seven degrees using two successive thirds you will form the seven primary chords of the key.

Note that western harmony is all built on thirds (alternate notes).

Because of the major scale pattern T T S T T T S you will always have a major chord on degrees 1, 4 and 5, forming the I, IV, and V chords.

On the second, third and sixth degrees you will always have minor chords, II, III, and VI.

On the seventh step you will always have a diminished chord forming the very tritone that is used in the dominant seventh chord from the fifth step.

Adding another third to each triad will form the secondary sevenths using notes 1,3,5 and 7 from each degree. On degrees 1 and 4 you will always have a major seventh (major third, minor third, major third). On degrees 2, 3 and 6 you will always get a minor seventh (minor third, major third, minor third).

On the fifth degree, the dominant, you will get a unique seventh (major third, minor third, minor third) which we call a dominant seventh (after the degree).

On the seventh degree you will get a half-diminished chord (minor third, minor third, major third).

Note that a minor is the relative minor of C major, D minor is the relative minor of F major and E minor is the relative minor of G major.

Now rewrite these chords in this order:

F major, C major, G majorD minor, A minor, E minor

Now compare that with a diagram of the circle of fifths.

Write the B diminished above the G major and add them together to form the dominant seventh. That's how Gary gets the rootless dominant 7b9 from a diminished seventh or a rootless dominant seventh from a simple diminshed triad.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/27/1211:25 AM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Now rewrite these chords in this order:

F major, C major, G majorD minor, A minor, E minor

Now compare that with a diagram of the circle of fifths.

That is lovely! I'd never noticed that before. It's a quarter of the circle of fifths, with major keys on the outside (or top, typed here) and relative minor keys on the inside (or bottom, typed here). These are also all the "nearby" keys for changing key one accidental at a time from the original key.

Rewriting with roman numerals, which helps me see the general pattern:

Code:

IV, I, V
IIm, VIm, IIIm

So it shows that each of the primary chords of a key, except for VIIdim, can become the I or Im chord of a nearby key.

Does this show substitutes also? So IIm can substitute for IV, VIm can substitute for I, and IIIm can substitute for V? Also VIIdim can substitute for V?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/27/1212:24 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

F major, C major, G majorD minor, A minor, E minor

Now compare that with a diagram of the circle of fifths.

Write the B diminished above the G major and add them together to form the dominant seventh. That's how Gary gets the rootless dominant 7b9 from a diminished seventh or a rootless dominant seventh from a simple diminshed triad.

All clear on the circle of 5ths, but not clear on what you mean by adding Bdim to G major to form the dominant 7th.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/27/1201:45 PM

On the 7th degree we have a diminished. When we add the 3rd above (will always be major third above) we have a half diminished.

The third above the diminished chord on the seventh degree will always be a major third above when in a major key.

The chord can either be called "half-diminished" or "minor 7 flat 5". There are two possible notations. One notation uses a circle with a slash that ought to be a superscript, but sort of like this (except make the circle smaller and higher): Bø. The other uses m7b5, like this: Bm7b5.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/27/1202:46 PM

The pattern, major third, minor third, minor third is unique to the dominant/5th degree so we call it a dominant seventh (or just a plain seventh as opposed to a major seventh or minor seventh).

I am glad that you wrote both parts. There is a major trap in the theory books which I almost fell into myself. The form itself is as you wrote:G(major third)B(minor third)D(minor third)Fin root position.Or you can also see it as a major triad, where the "seventh" (F) is a minor 7 above the root G. In jazz or popular music where letter names for chords are used, it is commonly known as the "seventh chord". I prefer this in most cases, for a reason.

Dominant is one of the names of the degrees of a scale. These degrees are as follows: In a C major scale:C - Tonic (the tone that is set; i.e. it's in C major)D - Supertonic (means above the tonic)E - Mediant (a third above)F - Subdominant (it's under the dominant)G - Dominant (It plays a major or dominant role. It is the second strongest note that the music wants to go to.)A - Submediant (a third below)B - Leading note (has a strong pull that "leads" to the Tonic. That's why in a G7 chord, the B tends to rise to C).

These are "functions" or roles which in simpler music tend to happen, or that we often see happening in music. It goes together with our I, IV, V Roman Numerals which point to functions.

Dominant seven refers to the "dominant" or V chord specifically which has the seven, and it usually leads to the tonic in our V7 progression. It uses all of the notes in the key for major keys. In minor keys, the third is raised (In C minor, the Bb is raised to Bnat so we still have G7 and not Gm7, to get V7-I = G7-Cm). The Dom7 happens to have the shape of *(major third)*B(minor third)*(minor third)* that Richard has mentioned.

In music we will often see a "seven chord" with that shape where it is not playing the role of "dominant" leading to the tonic. That is why that name presents a problem unless we've sorted that out. When I discovered this, I went back and checked in my theory books. They make sure to only show examples of seven chords functioning as dominants, going to I, so students never ask awkward questions. I was almost trapped into thinking that seven chords can only be dominants (V's), because that's all the theory books presented.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/27/1209:29 PM

In music we will often see a "seven chord" with that shape where it is not playing the role of "dominant" leading to the tonic. That is why that name presents a problem unless we've sorted that out.

No worries here. I have been playing 7th's forever and only since joining the analysis threads in the last month or so, have paid much attention to what a dominant really was/meant.

This is all really good information. I'm printing out some notes from this recent thread activity as I think will help immensely in my understanding and better analysis moving forward. There is actually a lot to absorb here, when working through all the keys, and minor keys everyone

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/27/1210:11 PM

I had learned to use the term "dominant seventh" if I need to be precise, regardless of whether it's functioning as V7 to I. This is so that the type of seventh chord which is "major triad plus minor seventh" has a name, just like all the other types of seventh chords:

Is there anything incorrect with this? You may notice I did not include minor triad plus major 3rd. I do not think I have ever come across this. But, suppose it would be a minor major 7, although I would have probably called it something entirely different.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/27/1211:54 PM

You have the intervals and names correct. I think it's useful to know the intervals from the root as well.

For example, dropping back to triads: a major triad can be thought of as a major third followed by a minor third. It can also be thought of as a major third and a perfect fifth above the root. It's the latter description which leads to us talking about "the fifth of a chord.". For example, "C7 without the fifth" is C E Bb, and you might want to describe that voicing.

Similarly for sevenths above the root.

I also find it easier to calculate a seventh -- 1-3 half-steps below the tonic (an octave up) than I find it to calculate a major or minor third above the fifth.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/27/1211:59 PM

I should say, I do like working through the stacked thirds descriptions, because I like running through all the possibilities for two or three stacked thirds. And, hey, now that I know about extended chords, why stop at just stacking three thirds in four note chords. On to four thirds in five note chords! Etc.!

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/28/1203:10 AM

Oh my! I haven't seen binary since taking a machine language programming course way back when, in which I barely got a pass. I see what you're doing. You're seeing patterns of majors and minors, rather than literally binary, yet you're also counting them off in binary. That's actually quite cool.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/28/1208:09 AM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

It does require accepting that a dominant seventh chord may be built (using accidentals) on a note which is not the dominant of the key you're in.

The fault is with the system. When it is built on the fifth degree of the scale it is the dominant seventh of the key. (In the ABRSM Manual of scales and arpeggios GBDF is called the dominant seventh of C not G7).

When it is formed on the tonic or fourth of the key it is a dominant seventh (type) chord.

In letter chord symbols the seventh is minor by default. In RN's the seventh is diatonic by default so C7 in key F is V7 but in C key is Ib7.________________

Clever work with the binary. A 'mirrored' system might be better; least significant bit on the right being the first third etc. then there's no awkward change in notation from fifths to sevenths.

If you extended this concept into the next octave you will reach a point where a stack of minor thirds has reached a higher interval than a stack of major thirds. Although the chords are tertian (built on thirds) they are actually alternate notes.

So is it conceptually a root, plus a third, plus another third, etc. or is it a root, plus a third (major or minor), plus a fifth (diminished, perfect or augmented), plus a seventh (major, minor, or diminished), etc.? And does it make a difference in practise? It might get rid of sixths, sus2's, and sus4's (but I have a theory about those anyway).

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

I don't claim this is any use for sonata analysis...

It helps to show the details in the fundamentals of chord construction/naming and the relation to the underlying scale. If it helps to make it clearer for you then it may help to make it clearer for others.

We're analysing sonatas as much to try and learn the musical language as the converse. Your thinking helps.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/28/1212:57 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

It helps to show the details in the fundamentals of chord construction/naming and the relation to the underlying scale. If it helps to make it clearer for you then it may help to make it clearer for others.

We're analysing sonatas as much to try and learn the musical language as the converse. Your thinking helps.

Agree. Certainly helps me.

So now, testing out my new found wisdom for M21-M27

I will name the chords here, as I believe this may pose a stumbling point for identifying key if I get these wrong.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/28/1201:35 PM

The C#dim7 comes from the key of D minor, and is making the following Dm chord seem more inevitable. It is VIIdim7 in the key of D minor, and can also be seen as a rootless A7b9, a.k.a. V7b9 in the key of D minor.

Not saying we're in D minor at any point, just pointing out a use of accidentals to make a progression to a particular chord (in this case Dm) seem more inevitable.

I want to say that D is being briefly tonicized here, and C#dim7 comes from the land of secondary dominants, but I don't know if I'm using that language wrong. Greener, I don't know if we've talked about tonicization and secondary dominants in our analysis threads yet. I'll try to explain what I mean better, if someone else doesn't jump in first with a better explanation. Right now I'm trying to think about how to talk about the promised more basic information of chords in minor keys...

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/28/1202:21 PM

Back to my series leading up to dim7 chords.

Before talking about chords in minor keys, I want to talk about roman numerals some more. I'm not sure I need this; I could just avoid roman numerals in what I'm going to say next. But I like roman numerals, because they show me patterns, so I want to be able to use them. So I have to talk about how I will use them in minor keys.

There are a couple of different ways of using roman numerals in minor keys. The way I'm going to show is not actually how I originally learned these; it's a system I learned later, but I think it's more flexible for the variety of harmonies one might want to analzye. The original system I learned worked best only for highly tonal music with a restricted set of chords and key changes.

In this post I'm going to just talk about roman numeral names for chords with accidentals. The post comes out quite long, and I'm not sure this is the best order to approach this in. So if this just makes your eyes glaze over, skip over it, and the next post will show more examples. It might be easier to pick this up just from examples rather than me trying to give this theoretical explanation first.

That said, here's the theoretical explanation. There's no music in this post; it's purely notation.

Roman numerals for chords with accidentals in a major key

Let's suppose that we're in a major key. Say, C major. Then we've seen, for example, the triads that are native to C major:

C, Dm, Em, F, G, Am, Bdim.

In roman numerals:

I, IIm, IIIm, IV, V, VIm, VIIdim.

Suppose I start to allow accidentals, while staying in the key of C major? What would I call, for example:

Fm (F Ab C)? Answer: IVm.

Em(maj7) (E G B D#)? Answer: IIIm(maj7).

D6 (D F# G A)? Answer: II6.

And so on. I just replace the letter with the appropriate roman numeral.

Roman numerals for chord roots with accidentals in a major key

Now what if I allow accidentals even in the root of the chord, still staying in the key of C major? For example:

Ebm (Eb Gb Bb)? Answer: bIIIm

F#dim7 (F# A C Eb)? Answer: #IVdim7

Bb (Bb d F)? Answer: bVII

C#m(maj7) (C# E G# B#)? Answer: #Imaj7

For the root, I use the same roman numeral and put a flat ("b") or sharp ("#") on the front to show how the root has been altered from the normal note in the scale. Then I add on the usual chord naming parts.

For example, Ebm. The normal note in C major would be E, roman numeral III. So Eb is bIII. Then add on the decorations "m" for minor: bIIIm.

For example, C#maj7. The normal note in C major would be C, roman numeral I. So C# is #I. Then add on the decorations "m(maj7)" for a minor major seventh chord: #Im(maj7).

Notice that when identifying notes with letter names, we stick "b" and "#" after the letter. But when identifying notes with roman numeral names, we stick "b" and "#" before the letter.

What do "b" and "#" really mean?

I chose my example from C major, but I swept a key fact under the rug: with roman numerals, "b" and "#" mean "lower a half-step" and "raise a half step".

To illustrate, suppose I'm in the key of D major. What is the roman numeral name for Fm (F, Ab, C)?

The root is F.

The normal "flavor" of F that appears in the key of D major is F#, a.k.a. IV.

So, in the key of Bb major, the chord E7 is called #IV7 in roman numerals.

Key point: The roman numerals might have "b" or "#" tacked on in front, depending on if the root of the chord is a half-step lower ("b") or higher ("#") than the normal note as it appears in the major scale. This happens even when the letter name does not have "b" or "#". For example, in D major, Fm, but bIIIm. In Bb major, E7 but #IV7.

Wait, what about the minor keys?

This post is quite long enough, so I'm going to put the minor keys in another post. Poor minor keys, always being deferred.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/28/1202:29 PM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

The C#dim7 comes from the key of D minor, and is making the following Dm chord seem more inevitable. It is VIIdim7 in the key of D minor, and can also be seen as a rootless A7b9, a.k.a. V7b9 in the key of D minor.

Just seeing your new note now, PS88 re: series leading up to dim7 chords, but have not gone through it yet.

We had tossed about D minor before for this section. I chose it originally I think because of the Bb, C#. But we are certainly not there long.

Since this section is largely construed from development of movement 1, would it be safe to say that we are passing through D minor, shortly visiting F major and then heading straight home to Bb Major?

Sorry, but unfortunately I mostly think in Black and White and have a very difficult time with Grey.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/28/1204:09 PM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

So if this just makes your eyes glaze over, skip over it, and the next post will show more examples. It might be easier to pick this up just from examples rather than me trying to give this theoretical explanation first.

Actually, all clear so far.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

We end up in F, yes, briefly via Dmin, but in M26 the E nat makes it F7 the dominant of M27 Bb.

Not so clear; Fine with being back to Bb a measure sooner. But, how is (F,E notes) making it a F7 vs. Fmaj7?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/28/1204:23 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/28/1204:29 PM

Originally Posted By: Greener

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

The C#dim7 comes from the key of D minor, and is making the following Dm chord seem more inevitable. It is VIIdim7 in the key of D minor, and can also be seen as a rootless A7b9, a.k.a. V7b9 in the key of D minor.

Just seeing your new note now, PS88 re: series leading up to dim7 chords, but have not gone through it yet.

We had tossed about D minor before for this section. I chose it originally I think because of the Bb, C#. But we are certainly not there long.

Since this section is largely construed from development of movement 1, would it be safe to say that we are passing through D minor, shortly visiting F major and then heading straight home to Bb Major?

I haven't actually looked closely at any of the harmonies in this sonatina, so I based my "brief D minor" comment solely on the short snippet of chords that I saw posted.

I'm about to go on a business trip, and hopefully I'll remember to take my Sonatina scores with me on the plane, and catch up on the analysis you all have been doing.

Quote:

Sorry, but unfortunately I mostly think in Black and White and have a very difficult time with Grey.

Do you mean, the idea of briefly touching on a key, but not really being there? If so, I'm with you. I hate having to resort to just saying "accidentals for colour"; I always want to pin them down to some specific harmonic purposed, tonicizing a note being best of all. (Although I'll accept the stray Neapolitan sixth...). But I'm forced to admit that music doesn't always work that way, and I'm having to become more flexible in how I approach harmonic analysis.

B° Em Am Dm G C. And that progression is not the least bit unusual, showing the circle of “fourths”, if you wish.

Then you can tack on F, then show a cadence at the end:

B° Em Am Dm G C F G (or G7) C.

VIIdim7 IIIm VIm IIm V I IV V or V7 I

Originally Posted By: PS88

Rewriting with roman numerals, which helps me see the general pattern:

IV, I, VIIm, VIm, IIIm

So it shows that each of the primary chords of a key, except for VIIdim, can become the I or Im chord of a nearby key.

VIIdim can also become VIIm or VII (major), and this is the whole principle of secondary dominance. So in the key of C – I hope I am in the right key! – you can stick to comfortable RNs so long as you use any simple triad that belongs to the keys represented by I, IIm, IIIm, IV, V, IVm. It’s only when you go outside this limit that RNs get really clumsy. Thus a Ger 6th chord in C major, Ab7 or Ab(#6), suddenly leaves behind numbers, and that is my objection. “Ger” is English. We suddenly need something like bVI7 or bVI(#6) to stay in numbers.

Quote:

Does this show substitutes also? So IIm can substitute for IV, VIm can substitute for I, and IIIm can substitute for V? Also VIIdim can substitute for V?

I never thought of it that way. I would not call IIm a substitute for the simply reason that IIm V I is incredibly strong. Downward 5th movement. But it does also explain the duality of IIm/IV, and why EITHER chord going to V is about as common. It also intuitively hints at the fact that IIm7 contains IV – Dm7 = D **F A C**.

VIm really doesn’t substitute for I, which is why V to VIm is labeled a deceptive cadence. It’s horribly weak if mistakenly used for an ending, but it is great for delaying. Which is why Mozart and co. so often write G7, Am, Dm or F G(7) C. It’s musically the equivalent of “haha, just kidding, you’ll know where I’m going, and I’m going to make you wait.”

Also, you will not normally hear IV VIIdim I, but you WILL hear VIIdim to I, and even more often VII°7 to I (or Im).

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/28/1205:01 PM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Do you mean, the idea of briefly touching on a key, but not really being there?

No, I'm fine with that. Just mean when I look at, M21-M26 for example, I prefer to know the final conclusion, consensus and outcome of our analysis. Otherwise, I am likely to keep pestering with more questions.

So for example, when you say I think we are visiting D minor, but not saying we are in D minor and then not confirming my F major ... well, that just throws me into a tail spin. But, thankfully, Richard saved the day and confirmed we were pretty close. And VIOLA, my heart rate is back to normal

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/29/1210:57 AM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

The final movement is likely to be fast but not as intellectually engaging as a sonata form movement.

Rondo: a musical form in which the principaltheme is repeated several times, with short sectionsbased on different themes (called episodes) inbetween each restatement of the opening theme;sometimes one or more of the episodes is alsorepeated, a common pattern being ABACABA. Therondo was often used for the final movements ofClassical sonata-form works

I have just had a precursory glance at this final Rondo movement. On first glance it looked/sounded involved, but the Rondo definition (above,) explains a bit. There is some clear recognition to 1st movement, not so sure about the 2nd movement yet.

I have not had a chance to identify the sections, keys and where all the content is coming from yet. Starting out, we are back in F Major and in cut time (2/4.)

Unfortunately, I need to be away for a few hours now. But, anxious to move forward with this today and keen to see any further insight upon my return.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/30/1207:49 AM

What's a Sonata-Rondo?

A rondo is basically ABACADA etc. The sonata-rondo complements the sonata principle so B is in dominant, C is the development section (usu. in varied keys) and D is the B section in tonic. Most of the rondos I can think of off-hand have a coda section different to the closing cadence of A.

There are no fixed definitions, however. There are many, many variations.

The most famous rondos are probably the third movement of Beethoven's Pathétique, an excellent example of sonata-rondo, and Mozart's Alla Turca from his Sonata K.331, which is not strictly a Rondo. His Rondo an A minor, K511, is a much finer example of the form.

So what do we have here? The structure appears to be a da capo ternary, ABA, form. Here, M28-52 is clearly the development section.

M1-28 are the AB and AD (or AB') combined. M1-7 is our rondo theme, A. Our B section (in the dominant key) is M7-12. The A theme returnes in M13-19 and the remainder remains in tonic, M19-28 so must be our B in tonic.

I don't foresee a struggle finding out where the material comes from for the development section. Tying the piece up to the other two movements is a bit more of a challenge but needn't detain us if it's not obvious.

I'd be as happy with A = M1-12 and B = M13-28 but you do need to make sure you understand why B shouldn't start mid-phrase and if A = M1-10 (10 measures) then A = M13-28 (16 measures) must be wrong. B = M11-12 seems more like a change of phrase ending than a whole section (even without looking at the score). Does that make sense?

If I were to just listen to this, without looking at the score or listening to/for key modulations, I would call this a rondo as the theme is very distinctive and makes four clear returns.

I would treat the terms rondo and sonata-rondo as a vagaries or as a challenge to find the form in that particular instance. I would delight in finding a movement, like Beethoven's Pathétique, when the A section preceded every episode including the coda.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/30/1201:03 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

What's a Sonata-Rondo?

Rondo form is often combined with elements of sonata form to produce the sonata-rondo. The sonata-rondo has a development section similar to that in a sonata form and is outlines A B A -development section- A B A.

I wasn't so keen on the previous definition as I did not see how it would fit. So went searching and found this one, which seemed to me to fit better.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

I'd be as happy with A = M1-12 and B = M13-28 but you do need to make sure you understand why B shouldn't start mid-phrase and if A = M1-10 (10 measures) then A = M13-28 (16 measures) must be wrong. B = M11-12 seems more like a change of phrase ending than a whole section (even without looking at the score). Does that make sense?

Yes, making more sense. I had a big problem -- as is evident -- in trying to figure out where to put these labels. With the main theme returning I wanted to call this A again.

Can a second A have any extra/fewer measures? I believe we had a couple of extra in the 2nd movement, but it was just a repeat of 2 already used measures and was not as drastically out of whack as was the case here.

The development section is the C section? Would we just call it that "C" and not development at all?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 09/30/1202:34 PM

When we get to the end of Clementi we can look further afield (Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven). We still have the Moonlight unfinished although I don't know what Jim's involvement is at present. He may have finished the first movement by the time we resume analysis of it.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/01/1208:56 AM

If I were to just listen to this, without looking at the score or listening to/for key modulations, I would call this a rondo as the theme is very distinctive and makes four clear returns.

I for one, certainly feel more educated in terms of what to look for in a Rondo. In my case though, I am also quite happy that they write it at the top.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

I don't foresee a struggle finding out where the material comes from for the development section. Tying the piece up to the other two movements is a bit more of a challenge but needn't detain us if it's not obvious.

I'm good with the needn't detain us part. Turns out this is my least favorite aspect -- likely an indication of needing more attention -- of these analysis.

I will begin preparations for No. 5, understanding that questions for previous movements and/or Sonatinas will still be actioned.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/01/1210:23 AM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/01/1201:42 PM

Op 36. No. 5

M1-M34 Exposition; M1-15 G Major; M16 - M34 D Major

M35-M49 (half of M50) Development

M51 - M84 Recapitulation G Major and just skirting D Major

I need to look more at the development. There are lots of accidentals happening here, but unsure of any modulation change. I think we are likely to be skirting one key and shortly visiting another. But, final report pending, as I need to take to the bench for a bit to try and figure out.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/01/1202:20 PM

Looking good so far, Jeff.

Going back to your earlier point, considering each movement and determining what ties them together isn't normally very important. It might help if you want to get into composition and you're concerned that your individual movements don't fit together.

It becomes much more important when a single idea is developed between two movements. Beethoven's Moonlight is a case in point where the same idea is used for the first and third movements.

Finding out WHY the movements of a symphony or sonata belong together has always been of interest to me.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/01/1202:47 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Going back to your earlier point, considering each movement and determining what ties them together isn't normally very important. It might help if you want to get into composition and you're concerned that your individual movements don't fit together.

No, not thinking of composing any time soon. So, thanks for this information and I won't tie myself in knots about it anymore.

Are you sitting down for this next part? This is what I think is happening ...

Development:Start off in G Major but quickly move to G Minor then there is a transition measure at M40 through D Minor, this takes us to Bb Major. Then, another transition measure at M45 through D minor, and we are back to G Major. Tonic for the recap.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/01/1203:31 PM

Are you sitting down for this next part? This is what I think is happening ...

Quick! Somebody pass me a chair!

Have you sorted out the chords? What chord is that in M35? Is that chord in G major?

The development is not likely to be settling in any key but passing through them. It might be worthwhile naming the chords for each measure of the development - it's only 16 measures and one chord per measure for most of them. It would help identify possible keys (and rule some out).

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/01/1207:08 PM

The 7ths make me think we are moving through G major, Bb major, D major. Oh, and C major

The trouble I am having is where these (and other) chords may also fit within minor keys.

Question thus: Now that I have this list (if it is generally correct,) how do I make sense of it to tell me what's happening. I am using the chart you provided on the degrees, but it was all for major keys.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/01/1208:31 PM

The first movement ended with a ii-V-I cadence in D (M31-32). I guess the C natural in 35 could be read as back to G but...

Good read on the D7 for M35. It's not D7 until the last beat, of course, but C dim (C-F#-A) and functioning as a rootless D7. It's the dominant of G minor as well as G major and we're definitely on G minor here in both M36 and M37. This is true of all dominant 7 chords.

M38 I get the C# as colour over a D major.M39 I get as F7 (F-A-C-Eb), I'd want a G to call it Cm6, closing into Bb for M40.

I see the visited keys as G minor, Bb major, C minor. M46 on I see as dominant pedal rather than being in D major.

We looked at the relation of chords to the scale degrees for major now we must do the same for minor. It's not essential here as he's not really going into minor keys for any length of time and all dom 7's are dominant to the minor and major keys alike.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/01/1208:34 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/01/1209:36 PM

Parallel major and minor keys: same key letter name. E.g. D major and D minor..

Relative major and minor keys: same key signature. E.g. F major and D minor.

Roman numeral names for chords in a minor key

Reminder about roman numerals in a major key: Suppose we're in D major but we find chords Fmaj7, Bb, and C7. These roots are all a half-step lower than the normal notes in D major: F instead of F#, Bb instead of B, C instead of C#. In roman numerals, we call these bIIImaj7, bVI, and bVII.

What I mean is this: remember that from a major scale, you find the notes of the parallel natural minor scale by lowering the third, sixth and seventh notes by a half-step.

For example:

D major notes are: D E F# G A B C#.

D natural minor notes are: D E F G A Bb C.

Triads built using notes of D natural minor: Dm Edim F Gm Am Bb C.

Roman numeral names: Im IIdim bIII IVm Vm bVI bVII

Notice the roman numeral names in D minor for F, Bb and C major triads are bIII, bVI, and bVII. That is, we name the roots exactly the same as if we were in the parallel major key, D major, and found the chords F, Bb and C.

Look at the letter names for the chords from the D natural minor scale again. They may look familiar. In fact, they're exactly the same as the chords in F major (which I used as an example for the major chords). They're just all shifted in the list by two places.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/01/1210:18 PM

Remember in a major key, the tritones in the V7 and VIIdim chords contributed to the feeling of resolution in a V7-I or VIIdim-I progression?

Unfortunately, if we stick to the notes of a natural minor scale, we don't get the same effect.

Let's look at the type of seventh chord built on the fifth note of the natural minor scale. For example, in D minor consider Am7 (Vm7 in roman numerals). This has no tritone. In D major, we get V7 = A7 = A C# E G, and a tritone C#-G. But in D natural minor, we get Vm7 = Am7 = A C E G. The result of lowering C# to C turns the tritone into a plain old perfect fifth C-G.

Let's look at the chords from D natural minor that do have a tritone: Edim (IIdim) and C7 (bVII7). These both have the tritone E-Bb. But they want to resolve to F (bIII), not to the tonic Dm (Im).

Plus, let's forget chords for a minute, and just look at what happens when you run up a natural minor scale, compared to a major scale:

Sing or play up a major scale, but only seven notes: D E F# G A B C#... many people find that it sounds very incomplete to stop at C#, and want to finish the scale by continuing up to D. This note a half-step below the tonic, here C#, which leads so strongly to the tonic, is called the leading tone.

Sing or play up a minor scale, but only seven notes: D E F G A Bb C... many people find that it doesn't sound nearly as incomplete as with the major scale. There's not as much of a pull from C to D as there is from C# to D. We say that D natural minor has no leading tone.

What to do? Some people really like the sound of music wholly in a natural minor scale -- one of my choir directors, who was also a composer, loved the sound of that whole tone instead of semitone resolution. But to get the same feeling of tension and resolution to the tonic that we found in major keys, we have to do something to our natural minor scale.

Harmonic minor to the rescue

Suppose we fix up D minor by using C# instead of C. This gives us the D harmonic minor scale:

D E F G A Bb C#

In music, this will be written with a one-flat key signature, and lots of accidentals to keep changing C into C#.

It transforms the unruly C7 (bVII7) (C E G Bb) which wanted to resolve to F (III) into a more helpful C#dim7 (VIIdim7) (C# E G Bb) which is happy to resolve to Dm (Im). Yay!

So by raising one note by a half-step, we have acquired a leading tone and two nice chords to use in resolutions (V7 and VIIdim7). Actually, make that three chords to use in resolutions, because we can chop the top off of VIIdim7 and still have VIIdim with an appropriate tritone. Quadruple yay!

Exercises that may help

Pick a minor key. For example, E minor.

Practice forming the natural minor and the harmonic minor scale. Play them up and down. Listen to them.

Now practice forming the Vm7 and bVII7 chords, and the V7, VIIdim7, and VIIdim chords. Follow each chord by the Im chord. Listen to the effect.

Can you finds voicings which strengthen the aural effect? (I haven't offered any advice on how to do this yet: pure exploration at this point.)

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/01/1211:09 PM

Keys, as in - what key you are in:

Simplest first: the overall key that a piece is in which everyone probably knows. If a piece is in F major, then you will have a signature with one flat, lots of V-I chords (C-F, C7-F), and the music will usually end on F, often with the melody note being F. The composer often "establishes the tonality" in the beginning by hovering around the tonic: V-I-V-I (C-F-C-F) or other chords that like to move to I.- If the piece has one flat, but it's in D minor (the relative minor of F major), then the V-I will show as A-Dm or A7-Dm. Accidentals at the leading note (7 note) of D minor are strong clues: you'll see lots of C# for A and A7, and maybe C#dim. the piece will end on Dm, though occasionally you'll hear/see a "Picardie third" where the music suddenly becomes D major right at the end, with F being raised.

Modulations: We see modulations where music is definitely in a new key and stays there for a long time. A lot of the signs written above apply. We've encountered quite a lot of those. Especially in the older music you will expect it to modulate to a close key in the circle of fifths, say the dominant key or the relative or parallel minor (in Canada and maybe parts of Commonwealth countries we say tonic minor, not parallel).

There are briefer modulations that may only last a couple of measures or even one measure. I think it's a toss-up for the shortest ones whether you want to call the really short ones a temporary key. For certain you need more than one chord, probably at least something like V-I of that new key.

When music modulates to a new key it often does so gradually through a series of keys. I don't know if this is called "bridge" or "transition". I think that when that is happening you're not in any key.

In regards to V-I; you could have something like this going around the circle of fifths: G-C, C7-F; F7-Bb; Bb7-Eb - maybe with some other chords in between. The music is on the move toward a new tonality and hasn't settled down yet. I don't think I'd want to call these brief stops any kind of "key" unless it helps me in some way.

-- In four part harmony I learned to write the first chord, the final cadence (the V7-I) and then work toward the end from the end, backward, then knit front and back together. Doing something similar seems to help in analysis: finding where a new tonality is clearly established, finding the cadence, and then working backward to see how it was developed.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/01/1211:11 PM

I could be in D minor, I could be in F major, I could be in C major (not C minor). Is this correct? Are there others I could be in?

What I am trying to get my head around, is what is the least amount of information I would need to know in order to know what key I am in. Certainly, one F major triad would not be enough.

Would it be a number of chords that together, would mean the key could not be anything but? Or, am I going about this the wrong way.

Keys, as in - what key you are in:

Simplest first: the overall key that a piece is in which everyone probably knows. If a piece is in F major, then you will have a signature with one flat, lots of V-I chords (C-F, C7-F), and the music will usually end on F, often with the melody note being F. The composer often "establishes the tonality" in the beginning by hovering around the tonic: V-I-V-I (C-F-C-F) or other chords that like to move to I.- If the piece has one flat, but it's in D minor (the relative minor of F major), then the V-I will show as A-Dm or A7-Dm. Accidentals at the leading note (7 note) of D minor are strong clues: you'll see lots of C# for A and A7, and maybe C#dim. the piece will end on Dm, though occasionally you'll hear/see a "Picardie third" where the music suddenly becomes D major right at the end, with F being raised.

Modulations: We see modulations where music is definitely in a new key and stays there for a long time. A lot of the signs written above apply. We've encountered quite a lot of those. Especially in the older music you will expect it to modulate to a close key in the circle of fifths, say the dominant key or the relative or parallel minor (in Canada and maybe parts of Commonwealth countries we say tonic minor, not parallel).

There are briefer modulations that may only last a couple of measures or even one measure. I think it's a toss-up for the shortest ones whether you want to call the really short ones a temporary key. For certain you need more than one chord, probably at least something like V-I of that new key.

When music modulates to a new key it often does so gradually through a series of keys. I don't know if this is called "bridge" or "transition". I think that when that is happening you're not in any key.

In regards to V-I; you could have something like this going around the circle of fifths: G-C, C7-F; F7-Bb; Bb7-Eb - maybe with some other chords in between. The music is on the move toward a new tonality and hasn't settled down yet. I don't think I'd want to call these brief stops any kind of "key" unless it helps me in some way.

-- In four part harmony I learned to write the first chord, the final cadence (the V7-I) and then work toward the end from the end, backward, then knit front and back together. Doing something similar seems to help in analysis: finding where a new tonality is clearly established, finding the cadence, and then working backward to see how it was developed.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/01/1211:19 PM

Originally Posted By: Greener

Suppose I have an F major triad.

You have anticipated my next series of posts! Before answering, I have to pull in melodic minor.

Remember that in music theory the melodic minor scale (ascending) is formed by lowering just the third note of the parallel major scale. For example, D melodic minor: D E F G A B C#. (What is melodic minor for? It smooths out the jump in harmonic minor between the sixth and the seventh notes: for example, Bb to C# becomes B to C#.)

Let's just look at any extra major triads and their roman numeral names:

G major triad (IV)

Oops, that's it for new major triads. We already saw A major triad (V) when we looked at harmonic minor.

OK, now to answer your question. In all the chords-in-a-key that we have labelled, where have we found major triads?

In a major key, as I, IV, or V.

In a minor key, as bIII, IV, V, bVI, or bVII.

So F major triad could be...

In a major key:I of F major.

IV of... hmmm, if F is the fourth note, then the tonic is a perfect fourth lower. What's a perfect fourth below F? C! F could be IV of C.

V of... hmmm, the tonic would be a fifth lower: the key of Bb major.

In a minor key:

bIII... what's a minor third lower? D. F triad could be bIII of D minor.

IV... IV of C minor.

V... V of Bb minor.

bVI... bVI of ... hmmm, go down a minor sixth, that's like up a major third, that's A. bVI of A minor.

bVII... bVII of... go down a minor seventh, that's like up a whole step, that's G. bVII of G minor.

This is what I know from theory. Someone else can probably say which of these if some of these happen a lot more frequently than others.

This is one way of doing it, using what I've been laying out about the types of triads and seventh chords in major and minor keys.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/01/1211:28 PM

Originally Posted By: Greener

Suppose I have an F major triad.

I could be in D minor, I could be in F major, I could be in C major (not C minor). Is this correct? Are there others I could be in?

We had questions in theory rudiments where you were given a chord and asked "In what keys will you find this chord?" It seemed pointless, but for some nerdy reason I enjoyed it. I'm wondering whether there are ways other than what I use to get the answer.

FAC. We have to have F, A, and C occurring in that key signature. For major keys in flats, that happens for C major, F major, Bb major. But once we get to Eb major, there is an Ab in the signature, so that leaves us with 3 major keys where FAC is a chord:

C major, F major, Bb major.

In sharps keys, we're already stopped at G major.

The relative natural minor uses the same notes, which gives us

A nat min, D nat min, G nat min.

G harmonic minor and D harmonic minor are out, because of the raised F#, and raised C#, respectively. We can keepA harm. minor

The top half of minor scales (degrees 6 & 7) is variable. If you take the natural minor as a default: C,D,Eb,F,G,Ab,Bb,C, you can raise Bb to Bnat for the "harmonic minor", or raise Ab and Bb to Anat & Bnat for the "melodic minor".

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/01/1211:36 PM

(ETA: I left out IV7 in a minor key, and maybe others. And I crossposted with keystring, and now I want to rethink my answers using her method. Plus this is all purely theory, meaning: what chords can you theoretically build in what keys? It's not based on practicalities of "what are you most likely tomeet (or meet at all, taking context into account)?". But thus is an attempt at showing the kinds of ways I use knowing chord types and scales, and roman numerals to help cement it for me as only a few patterns and not 30 patterns.)

Other possibilities: the composer is not settling on any of those possible keys, but is just passing through. Or the composer is fooling around with accidentals just for the heck of it (well, no I'm sure the fooling around is for some musical reason). So to determine key you really need more than just one chord, or at the least a bigger chord.

Suppose you had F7. Where have we seen this type of seventh chord? We've seen V7 in a major key, and V7 or VII7 of a minor key.

So F7 could be V7 in Bb major, and we'd expect it to resolve to I (Bb).

Or F7 could be V7 in Bb minor, and we'd expect to see Im (Bbm) pretty soon.

Or F7 could be VII7 in G minor, but we'd expect it to still resolve down a fifth, to Bb (bIII).

Or, since we have just seen that a 7 chord can resolve to either a major or minor chord, perhaps F7 will resolve to Bb (bIII) instead of Bm (bIIIm).

So we were most likely in the key Bb major, Bb minor, or G minor. At least, assuming we were in a key. Maybe we were just passing through a key (but what would we be passing through? Bb major, Bb minor, or G minor. And if it's G minor, we still might expect that a form of Bb chord will show up soon.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/02/1212:31 AM

keystring, although I used natural, harmonic, and melodic minor scales as stages to build the types of chords in minor keys, ultimately I mostly just use the resulting ensemble of notes and chords:

D minor easily includes D E F G A Bb B C# C. It might have IVm or IV, Vm or V, bVII or VIIdim. Among other possibilities. And I'm usually combining a lot of information, more than just one chord, to determine key, or tonicization.

I like those kinds of exercises too, about what scale a chord might occur in. And I might approach the solution in various ways, depending on the chord quality and even the exact notes. There are larger, more contextual questions to ask, so it might be easy to dismiss the exam-type questions as irrelevant theoretical busy-work. But I think the exam-type microscope-vision questions are trying to foster the learning of skills that can be components of answering the larger, more interesting questions. But that's me; I'm a hopeless optimist about exams, and I think easily in terms of rules and symbols. There are probably ways to build someone's skills at the larger questions, by a different route.

Look at what I've been laying out. A lot of detail about roman numerals, a lot of repetitive exercises in building a restricted set of chords (triads and types of sevenths) from restricted sets of notes, suggestions to practice with yet more repetitive exercises on order to learn certain patterns that occur over and over. And all this is premised on knowing scales and chords, which if I had laid that out would have included a whole nother set of detail and repetitive exercises to get the patterns ingrained.

And all of this is merely prep work to set the stage for a few simple principles that help orient me in harmonic analysis of music that is not too chromatically complex.

Could I have laid it out differently? Perhaps. Although, since I'm trying to lead up to how *I* think about dim7 chords, I think I get at least half a pass on laying it out in this way, because I think this is the underpinnings of how I think about harmonic analysis. It's not a complete story even now; I suspect there are lots of things I use in harmonic analysis that I haven't mentioned yet.

There are other kinds of approaches -- aural, kinesthetic, inductive rather than deductive, etc. -- to reach the same endpoint of being able to understand music in the way we're trying to learn on this thread. And maybe (probably?) some of those approaches are better for some (most?) people, and sidestep or avoid or reach in a more intuitive way how to understand and talk about harmony. But unless we want to completely ditch any connection between chords and keys, what interests me about a question with an answer like "F7 could be IV7 in C melodic minor" (*) is "what underlying skills is it trying to foster, where do we use those skills, and are there alternate ways to teach and evaluate those skills, and perhaps even how to answer this kind of question, other than what might seem tempting, to teach a memorized meaningless routine?"

(*) rats, I left out a place where a 7 chord can appear: as IV7 in a minor key. So F7 above might be IV7 in C minor. I think that's the last of the possibilities, but I'm not sure: that will teach me to leave unfinished the cataloguing of chords in harmonic and melodic minor!

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/02/1201:50 AM

OK, what I have been leading up to: among all the chords we have seen as we named types of triads and seventh chords formed from notes in various conventional scales, where have we seen dim7?

Answer: in exactly one place. As VIIdim7 in a minor key. For example, C#dim7 only appears (in our restricted set of chords) as VIIdim7 of D minor.

OK. That's really it about dim7 chords. But let me expand:

This is the first way I learned about dim7 chords. I have learned other things, like how a dim7 chord can slip and slide in many directions (perhaps notated with enharmonic spellings), and that there are essentially only three dim7 chords, and that on lead sheets dim7 chords are named by their lowliest note, and that the spelling can be a clue for where a dim7 chord is going.

But when I see a dim7 chord, I start with what were my first fundamentals. I rearrange the notes so it stacks up as an official series of actual skip-a-letter minor thirds, I name it by the bottom of the stack of thirds, (and specify inversion) and then I start expecting to see the minor key or minor chord a half-step up.

For example, if I see the notes (from lowest to highest) F G# D B, I shuffle them around until I have a stack of formally named minor thirds: G# B D F. (This is actually what I do with every chord I see; there are some patterns I've learned that help me do this faster than when I first learned it, and there's a whole nother art to working things out when notes are missing, but this is how I started: with examples of complete four-note chords.). Anyway, I've stacked my chord up in thirds. Then I figure out what type of chord it is. This is when I first discover that I have a dim7 chord on my hands. G#dim7, or G#dim7/F if I'm keeping track of inversions, which I didn't use to much care about, but come to find out they're interesting and have important patterns for analysis. So what is G# the leading tone of? Half-step up: A. So I expect to find the key of A minor, or maybe just an Am chord, or maybe other important chords from the key of A minor -- perhaps E7 -- or maybe this is just part of a big continuous circle-of-fifths style progression, and I'm going to find Am but already jazzed up with a seventh to lead somewhere else as Am7.

Or maybe, I'm told VIIdim7 can go to I as well as Im (I haven't actually noticed any examples of this yet to register them consciously, but I'm keeping an eye peeled) so maybe A major chord is coming instead of A minor. But my basic expectation is A minor, or something related to that key.

Now, this might not always be what a dim7 chord does. But I think that in the music we've analyzed, this is what has happened, a lot. Not to say that we're always IN that minor key, so dragging out the roman numeral notation VIIdim7 may not be appropriate. And there are other ways to get to the same final result, and over time I may get more comfortable using those other ways first. And in particular, learning other ways to think about dim7 chords might help with my sight-reading of them (and I do mean sight-reading, not just plain reading).

But essentially, once I find a stack of thirds that I can name dim7, I'm expecting "minor, a half-step up".

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/02/1203:01 AM

Another reason I love dim7 chords -- actually dim triads -- is that I like underdogs. And I see dim chords as underdogs. "Learn all the triads in a key, but, ick, don't bother with the last chord, it's wierd. Ignore it for now.". "Modes are interesting, but, ick, don't write in Locrian, because it's nasty."

And another reason is that I find the sound interesting.

I know, it's completely backwards. First theory, then foolish personification, and only last, sound.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/02/1203:20 AM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

I know, it's completely backwards. First theory, then foolish personification, and only last, sound.

Heck, first time I heard the "melodic minor scale" the way it is officially taught, I instantly saw a character that had a personality disorder. I saw this rather literally. Going up: "I'm minor, you can hear that, right?" Half ways up he changes his mind (it's a he, and he wears a straw hat), "As I said, I'm as major as I can be." Then he tilts his straw hat, descends, and says "I never said such a thing. I am a very natural minor, and always was."

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/02/1208:10 AM

Ooh, there's been a lot written since I finished last night!

Now let me throw a spanner into the works while heads are still spinning.

The natural minor shares the same key signature as the relative major but the leading note being a tone down no longer functions as a leading note. For the music to function at a cadence the seventh note must be sharpened. The harmonic minor scale uses the sharpened seventh (nat min key sig, 7 sharpened by accidental).

The interval between the sixth and seventh then becomes an augmented second. It's uncomfortable to sing so when the melody is rising to tonic the sixth is also sharpened to make the melody smoother. When the melody is descending it no longer needs the leading note for the 7-8 effect so both sixth and seventh notes revert to their natural (minor) pitches. This is the reason for the melodic minor scale; flatted third rising, flatted third, sixth and seventh falling (nat min key sig, 6 & 7 sharpened by accidentals).

For harmonic analysis (where harmony needs to be functional) I use the harmonic minor scale plus a bit of natural. Natural minor key signature plus sharpened seventh. I don't follow PS88's convention with Roman Numerals. If you're defining a cadence or a simple harmonic progression, RN's work nicely to show function but if you're modulating and changing keys RN's are a minefield.

C minor: B nat, Eb, Ab [+ Bb].

I C Eb G: C minor

II D F Ab: D diminished

III Eb G Bb: Eb major orIII Eb G B: Eb augmented

IV F Ab C: F minor

V G Bb D: G minor orV G B D: G major

VI Ab C Eb: Ab major

bVII Bb D F: Bb major orVII B D F: B diminished

The augmented chord on III was seldom used before the late nineteenth century (Liszt and Debussy) - the minor III is seldom used in major keys either. The chord on the seventh degree was mostly used, as in the major scale, as a rootless dominant seventh or a transpositional device.

How does it fit on the circle of fifths? Recall the major scale for C major:

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/02/1210:32 AM

Other possibilities: ... Or the composer is fooling around with accidentals just for the heck of it (well, no I'm sure the fooling around is for some musical reason).

Perhaps they just wanted to confuse the heck out of Greener.

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

And all this is premised on knowing scales and chords, which if I had laid that out would have included a whole nother set of detail and repetitive exercises to get the patterns ingrained.

Among my biggest challenge at this point are the minor scales. Since every major scale has it's relative minor and share the same key signature, only a natural minor applies in terms of the key signature. Is this correct so far?

Melodic, harmonic -- and understand many others -- are of help in further understanding cadences. Is this also correct.

There is a lot to digest from the overnight posts, so hope no quizzes forthcoming today. So far have just read through everything. It is all great but will be sinking in I think over time.

So, just want to further inquire on a few things at a time as we move along. There will be more ...

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/02/1211:03 AM

I was holding out a bit as I wasn't quite done reading. So some of my previous questions, already confirmed.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

The natural minor shares the same key signature as the relative major but the leading note being a tone down no longer functions as a leading note. For the music to function at a cadence the seventh note must be sharpened. The harmonic minor scale uses the sharpened seventh (nat min key sig, 7 sharpened by accidental).

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/02/1206:44 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Ooh, there's been a lot written since I finished last night!The natural minor shares the same key signature as the relative major but the leading note being a tone down no longer functions as a leading note. For the music to function at a cadence the seventh note must be sharpened. The harmonic minor scale uses the sharpened seventh (nat min key sig, 7 sharpened by accidental).

The interval between the sixth and seventh then becomes an augmented second. It's uncomfortable to sing so when the melody is rising to tonic the sixth is also sharpened to make the melody smoother. When the melody is descending it no longer needs the leading note for the 7-8 effect so both sixth and seventh notes revert to their natural (minor) pitches. This is the reason for the melodic minor scale; flatted third rising, flatted third, sixth and seventh falling (nat min key sig, 6 & 7 sharpened by accidentals).

Just an additional point. The melodic minor scale, as it is often taught (see Hanon) assumes 6 and 7 ascending as it is in a major scale but lowered when descending.

From this it is easy to assume that “melodic” can not go “down” the same way. But a melodic minor scale, as I am defining it here, with the same degrees used both ways, is VERY common when a dominant is used, and you find it all over the place in Bach, for instance, this way:

LH plays G or G7 in key of C minor. RH plays D C B A G F Eb D C...

A good piece to examine this in would be CPE Bach Solfeggio, obviously not by THE Bach, but CPE Bach was trained by “Dad”.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/02/1207:11 PM

Originally Posted By: Greener

I was holding out a bit as I wasn't quite done reading. So some of my previous questions, already confirmed.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

The natural minor shares the same key signature as the relative major but the leading note being a tone down no longer functions as a leading note. For the music to function at a cadence the seventh note must be sharpened. The harmonic minor scale uses the sharpened seventh (nat min key sig, 7 sharpened by accidental).

Relative minor shares the same key signature. In the harmonic minor the 7th is raised, which creates a leading note, and gives us a real dominant seven chord (G7 instead of Gm7). Example of relative minor: C major, A minor.

Tonic or Parallel minor has the same tonic note. Example: C major, key of C minor. You can still figure out the key signature as per above. C minor has the key signature of Eb major. This also tells you which notes are lowered when comparing C major and C minor. C minor has Eb, and Ab, but the "Ab" of Eb major tends to stay B because of the harmonic minor. You can go back and forth either way.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/02/1207:24 PM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

For example, C#dim7 only appears (in our restricted set of chords) as VIIdim7 of D minor.

I just wanted to chime in and mention that this so-called VIIdim7 chord is just as likely to show up in a major key. And because even somewhat sophisticated music does not stay strictly in major or minor, I use a different system from the traditional one, but we should define it:

Traditional, major:

Using upper and lower case: I ii iii IV V iv vii I. Some people write vii°, but that is not necessary.

Traditional, minor:

i ii (ii°) III iv v OR V, VI VII

For me this is system is NUTS because of minor, which is not a dependable concept but rather a set of pitches that is in continuous flux.

And that is why I drive traditionalists nuts, always using major as my default, then referring to chords within a major scale framework. For me in the key of Cm we can have a I chord, since obvious C may move to Fm. In traditional thinking we have to name C as V or IV, and although that is logical, it always short-circuits my brain.

I am mentioning this because if we call Eb bIII in the key of C minor, many people are going to be confused. I wanted to bring this out before we run into problems. I use my own system, which is really very close to at least one jazz system, but it could throw people here directly to Mars!!!

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/02/1208:01 PM

Gary, I was trying to present the roman numerals as you use them, because I have come to think of them as the most powerful and flexible system I know for music that may borrow notes from outside the scale of the key. If you think we should use another system on this thread, let me know and I'll correct what I've written. The qualities of the chords stay the same (the part after the roman numeral). What changes is whether the roman numeral has a flat, sharp, or nothing in front of it. At least, if we're at least agreed on all upper-case roman numerals.

In the system I originally learned, in Dminor, C7 is VII7 and C#dim7 is vii°7. Fine for certain kinds of music, but there are weaknesses in this system.

Richard, keystring, any thoughts on roman numeral system to use?

I like that Gary's system allows me to say Cdim is VIIdim in C major, and it is also VIIdim in C minor. I don't have to say something like "it's #VIIdim in D minor" or "it's VIIdim in D harmonic minor".

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/02/1208:18 PM

The main reason I introduced the roman numerals was two-fold:

1. So I could point out the general pattern of chords in a minor key. There are other ways I could have pointed out the patterns, but for me roman numerals are the perfect shorthand for exhibiting a pattern, and I hoped that their role as pattern shorthand would be comprehensible to others.

2. So I could refer specifically to VIIdim7.

~~~~~~

I don't recall meeting a dim7 chord in a major key, unless it was heading towards the expected minor chord, but I haven't been paying close attention for this. I'lll keep my eyes peeled. Gary, I did expect that you would mention it.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/02/1210:16 PM

Having laid out all the patterns, I'm going to walk through the first movement of the Clementi Sonatina #4 showing how the dim7 orients me.

Imagine me identifying the chords throughout. I don't trust my ear enough to tell me all the interesting places to look at harmonies. Plus, I enjoy identifying dead-simple patterns like F F F or G7 C G7 C G7 C. Again, this is because my ear doesn't always identify these, at least not with an associated name for the quality of what is going on. So making the names is part of a long-term project for me to understand what I hear better, and also in the short-term allows me to, say, talk about whether a piece is harmonically simple or complex at any given point: again, because I don't trust my ear to give me full answers on that.

But for this post, I'm going to focus on just the parts where I spot a diminished, half-diminished, or fully diminished chord.

m. 3, Em7b5. Remember from our chord types that this shows up in only a few places. It shows up as VIIm7b5 in a major key, and as IIm7b5 in a minor key. I think I'm more used to seeing it in a major key, but maybe I haven't been paying close enough attention. It also turns out it shows up as VIm7b5 and VIIm7b5 in a harmonic minor scale, but I really don't remember seeing that in music before. I'll be on the lookout now, though. So, in letters Em7b5 might signal F major, D minor, or F minor. But since we're in F major already, and I'm (perhaps sloppily) used to expecting half diminished chords in a major key pretty much all the time, in fact I just think: "Em7b5, expect F major, oh yes we're IN F major, and the next chord is F, nice familiar pattern."

m. 6, Bdim. The next chord is C. Another nice familiar pattern, from VII dim to I in a major key. I'm not saying we're actually IN C major here, but what I'm basically thinking is "dim triad, therefore major or minor chord a half-step up will be familiar.". (Diminished triads show up in other places in the types of chords -- IIdim in natural minor, VIdim and VIIdim in melodic minor -- but I'm not so used to those.). Actually, omitting the Bdim for a moment, the progression from m.7 to m.9 is Gm/Bb C F. This is a IIm V I progression in our home key of F major. The brief Bdim before C serves to "tonicize" C: to make it seem inevitable. But then we perhaps don't really change keys to this inevitable C; we continue back to F. This is a very interesting progression because it crosses the division between phrases, or maybe it glues two phrases together by overlapping them on F in m.9.

m.32, Bdim/C. The C is a pedal, appearing in each of mm.31-33. Bdim makes me expect C major or C minor, and it's true that m.31 is C major; indeed here we are at the start of the exposition appearing, perfectly normally, to be in C major, just where the exposition left us. But wait, m.33 is C7, which, while it is a type of C chord, is unexpected. And the tritone F-B of Bdim doesn't resolve outward as expected to E-C. It resolves inward to G-Bb. And starting in m.34 we get a flurry of A, A7, and inverted Dm chords. Since A is a fifth above D, something D minor-ish is going on, although the lack of a cadence on a root position Dm chord might lead some to deny that we're actually in D minor. Not me, though, I like having a key to give me moorings.

Thinking Dm, I recall from melodic minor that Bdim might be VIdim (and there I just said I haven't seen these!), where the root, B, appears in the melodic minor scale. And then C7 can be bVII7, using notes from the natural minor scale. So from m.32 to the first beat of m.35, I have VIdim bVII7 V Im (with some inversions, which I'm ignoring). Hmm. Six, five, and one are familiar to me when associated in a six-two-five-one progression. Aha! If I rewrite m.33 as Edim/C, and treat C as a pedal point, I now have a sort of 6-2-5-1, even if the dim chords are unusual qualities for the 6-2. VIdim IIdim V Im (ignoring inversions).

I'm not sure if this is actually what it sounds like to people who can hear these things instead of just juggle symbols on paper. Indeed, way back at the Bdim, who would think we're in D minor? Nobody! We expect to still be in C major. The Bb in m.33 signals that it's not C major any more. The next most likely expectation might be that we're going back to our real home, F major, with a C7 F (V7 I) progression. Although if we realize we're starting a development section, we would be disappointed by returning home so soon, and Clementi doesn't disappoint, by taking us to the relative minor of F major, D minor.

m.38, F#dim7. I expect G minor. Sure enough, we get D7 (reduced to the bare minimum C D) and then in m.39 Gm. A lovely familiar two-five-one, in minor: IIdim7-V7-Im.

mm.40-41, Edim7. Expect F minor. Sure enough, we get (almost) the same thing as mm.38-39, a whole step lower: Edim7, a minimal pair of notes Bb and C to represent C7, and then... oh wait a second, the A naturals (instead of Ab) at the end of m.41 tell us that we're in F major. This to me is a surprise, because the Db of Edim7 belongs to F minor, not F major. On the other hand, C7 can quite respectably go to F instead of Fm. Plus Gary has been telling me that VIIdim7 can lead to either Im or I. So I'll chalk this one up to experience. And right after the previous post where I said I didn't remember meeting one of these!

Written out like this, I'm afraid it makes my process look long and tedious. But it doesn't feel long and tedious to me. To me it feels comfortable and fun and like making sense out of random strings of notes and turning up occasional jewels to surprise and delight.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/02/1210:29 PM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Gary, I was trying to present the roman numerals as you use them, because I have come to think of them as the most powerful and flexible system I know for music that may borrow notes from outside the scale of the key. If you think we should use another system on this thread, let me know and I'll correct what I've written. The qualities of the chords stay the same (the part after the roman numeral). What changes is whether the roman numeral has a flat, sharp, or nothing in front of it. At least, if we're at least agreed on all upper-case roman numerals.

In the system I originally learned, in Dminor, C7 is VII7 and C#dim7 is vii°7. Fine for certain kinds of music, but there are weaknesses in this system.

Richard, keystring, any thoughts on roman numeral system to use?

I like that Gary's system allows me to say Cdim is VIIdim in C major, and it is also VIIdim in C minor. I don't have to say something like "it's #VIIdim in D minor" or "it's VIIdim in D harmonic minor".

You know why I prefer this system. I’ll continue to use it, but I am also used to “translating” to other systems that people know better. As you perfectly summed up, there are severe limits to the traditional RN system. In fact, there are limits to any numbering system, and that is why sometimes an “it is what it is system” is most handy. For me usually that means using letters!

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/02/1210:29 PM

Originally Posted By: keystring

Relative minor shares the same key signature. In the harmonic minor the 7th is raised, which creates a leading note, and gives us a real dominant seven chord (G7 instead of Gm7). Example of relative minor: C major, A minor.

This whole subject drives me nuts as a teacher. I’ve never known how to teach it.

The REAL story is that our key signature conventions are based on a very pure set of pitches or notes. Minor is simply major, starting on a different degree of the scale. So C major, C D E F G A B C

Becomes A minor, A B C D E F G A

Same key signature, and what could be easier?

Except as we ALL know, it has not been that simple for several centuries, and at any point in a piece in A minor it is just as likely that we will see a G# as a Gnat. The second most common chord in A minor will be the V chord, E G# B. So the key of A minor could be just as easily one sharp, G#, or two sharps, F# and G#. In other words, the key signature we have inherited is logical and works best for natural minor, but in the Baroque, Classical and Romantic periods, that form of minor no longer was the default.

I continue to teach that minor is major with “toggles”. We can depend on 3 being lowered most of the time, since it is on the tonic chord, but 6 and 7 are like little switches that continually flip up and down.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/02/1211:05 PM

Way back when, I had a flute book which tried to teach the three firms if minor scales. Natural, harmonic, and melodic. It illustrated with C minor, and maybe a few other keys, and talked about forming these scales by lowering third sixth and seventh degrees.

I hated it.

I thought it was the most dad-blasted useless thing I'd ever met. I refused to learn them.

I'm not sure when I finally learned about minor keys, but eventually I did, via the key signature as relative minor, and look at the last note to figure out which key is, the major or the minor. The accidentals didn't bother me. I was used to having accidentals in music and never wondered why they were there, just took them as instructions for what to play.

A long time later, I got Edly's Music Theory For Practical People and was introduced to the explanations for natural minor (Aeolian mode, so it's a logical choice to lower three six and seven, it's not just randomly made up for the heck of it), harmonic minor (to provide a leading tone), and melodic minor (to fix up the melodically jagged augmented second).

Lights went on!

What had been a complete mystery before, now made sense.

Several years later, I took a college course in harmonic analysis and when we learned about secondary dominants and changes of tonality and key, even more lights went on. Those apparently random accidentals all had a purpose!

I should say that I somehow managed to avoid a possible pitfall in learning about natural, harmonic, and melodic minor scales: I never expected that minor key music was somehow supposed to only use notes from one of the scales. And at some point I observed that the raised sixth and seventh from melodic minor were sometimes used descending, and that didn't bother me either.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/03/1212:15 AM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Way back when, I had a flute book which tried to teach the three firms if minor scales. Natural, harmonic, and melodic. It illustrated with C minor, and maybe a few other keys, and talked about forming these scales by lowering third sixth and seventh degrees.

I hated it.

I thought it was the most dad-blasted useless thing I'd ever met. I refused to learn them.

That sounds like a cookbook. Music Theory for Dummies. To me it sounds anti-intuitive, non-playful, and it reminds me of almost everything I experience in public school.

I think that the flaw I any such approach is that it separates scales from harmony, and even the word “harmony” does not convey the idea that I love most, “playing with chords”.

I also don’t know why we do not see it suggested more often that scales, any of them, are suggested BY chord structure. This is not the only factor, but it is huge.

I'm not sure when I finally learned about minor keys, but eventually I did, via the key signature as relative minor, and look at the last note to figure out which key is, the major or the minor. The accidentals didn't bother me. I was used to having accidentals in music and never wondered why they were there, just took them as instructions for what to play.

Quote:

Several years later, I took a college course in harmonic analysis and when we learned about secondary dominants and changes of tonality and key, even more lights went on. Those apparently random accidentals all had a purpose!

I know you wrote more, but for me this begins to bring it together. Secondary dominance is a start at seeing how much we can move, seeming to go everywhere, yet we still retain the feeling of “home”, and “home” is the key we are in, with all its complexities.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/03/1201:05 PM

Earlier, I just wrote out the triads and sevenths for the natural minor scale, and then adopted the raised leading tone from the harmonic minor scale and looked only at the fifth and seventh degrees of the scale, giving chords V7 and VII7.

I decided to do something I've never done before, which is write out all the triads and seventh chords in all three types of minor scales. (I have seen this done for triads in the Robert Pace method book.) Hey, you have to entertain yourself somehow when flying from Washington to Maine. Only Washington, D.C. though. If it had been from Washington State I'm sure I would have found time to compose a few sonatinas in classical form as well .

I discovered some interesting things. I'll start with major as a comparison point, and I'm doing this in C so I don't confuse myself with too many accidentals.

The way I learn, this is hard to learn by reading someone else's results, and easier to learn by getting the general idea of the exercise and then working it out myself, possibly multiple times to get more comfortable with it. But in this text based medium, all I can do is say, "here's what I've found, play with it yourself if you find it interesting."

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/03/1201:12 PM

Please let me know if you find any mistakes in the above.

Here are some more ideas from the above:

It highlights the small vocabulary of chords/harmonies used in the music we've been working with. How many augmented major seven chords have we met, compared to the number of dominant seventh or even diminished triads that we've met?

To me, it suggests a use for the exam-type question, about what type of scale contains a given chord. Suppose you've fallen in love with Ebaug(maj7) and want to write some music containing it. If you can figure out that this appears in the C harmonic minor and C melodic minor scales as bIIIaug(maj7), you have an idea of which notes you might try to build around it to create a melody and a harmony. Maybe real composers never think that way, and just look for things that sound good, or think in terms of "Eb G B D, what would lead up to that and what would lead away from it" and then later discover that the whole thing is feeling like C minor. Anyway, just an idea. This is the kind of way I think, but I am miles, nay, parsecs, away from being a real composer.

I don't think I'll remember the exact pattern of all these chords (note I didn't even write the lists out in roman numerals, and just eyeballed the pattern off the letter name chords). But they give me something to keep in mind: in a minor key, dim and m7b5 can occur more than just at scale degree VII. And something to wonder about: VIdim or IIm7b5... how might that actually be used in music? Where would it be progressing from and to?

Hmmm, maybe on my next flight I'll write out the roman numerals and start getting more familiar with these patterns.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/03/1201:30 PM

Doing this kind of thing, starting from rules and working out what can be concluded from the rules, is something I love, and probably a big part of why I got my degree in mathematics. It's the epitome of deductive logic.

Then the next application for me is to look at music and name these.

It's a later add-on for me to start caring about what do composers actually tend to do the most, and what is less common? (*)

And still a mostly foreign concept to wonder how these things sound, and not only in isolation, but especially one after the other.

I seem to have everything backwards.

(*) When I started to care about what composers do, is when I started to care about inversions, because I started to notice that there were patterns they used that depended, not just on the chords used, but on the specific inversion used. For example, a ii-I6/4-V7-I progression.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/03/1201:48 PM

When we left this to explore the minor keys we weren't sure what keys we were moving through in the development.

We finished the exposition at M34 in D major.

M35 looked like being F# dim until the last beat when it became an actual D7 instead of a rootless one and closed into G minor.

M39 F7 closed into M40 Bb

M43 G7 closed into M44 C minor

M45 A7 closed into M46 D major, which turned out to be the dominant pedal to return to G major for the recapitulation.

If you look at his path around the circle of fifths you'll find it's quite adventurous. He's achieved it using minor keys and playing on the fact that a dominant seventh closes into both major and minor tonics.

He's not toyed much with the material while he's done this either so it's much easier to follow.___________________________

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Richard, keystring, any thoughts on roman numeral system to use?

I need to read RNs in a number of conventions I wouldn't restrict myself to writing in just one. Use whichever one you're most comfortable with.

When the chords are diatonic VII7 tells me all I need to know even if I'm in an unfamiliar key, like G-flat. When the music get more complicated letter chords tell me how the chord relates to other local keys in the circle of fifths - RNs don't.

I frequently use lower case Romans for minor chords, but I'm just as likely to use upper case and know from the key whether it's major or minor but when a piece is modulating, Romans make life harder rather than easier.

____________________________

Eb G B D: I'd either stick with Eb aug or move to G major.

_____________________________

With all the possibilities of added secondary sevenths I'd want to practise designing something like the London Underground Map first.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/03/1202:33 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Eb G B D: I'd either stick with Eb aug or move to G major.

Richard, that's a VERY interesting chord, and by itself it just doesn't sound like it is part of C minor. But in fact you can find it somewhere in Bach's Chromatic Fantasy and Fugue, although I forget what key it is, and it resolves like this:

Eb G B D--->>>Eb G C

Also a great favorite of Liszt.

It has a VERY powerful dominant sound, and I've never understood why it works, it just does.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/03/1202:41 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

I need to read RNs in a number of conventions I wouldn't restrict myself to writing in just one. Use whichever one you're most comfortable with.

This is exactly what I do.

For something strictly diatonic, minor and natural minor,something like III is just fine. C minor, III does the job for Eb. But when things become more complicated,then I need bIII, in case I want to move to Ebm to do a quick modulation. Then I can go bIII to bIIIm, then move somewhere else, then zip back to Cm, which I would make explict with Im.

All upper case is more flexible when combined with the same symbols we use for LCs (letter chords), because then we can do X, Xm, Xdim, Xaug, Xm7b5, and we can also show root with a number.

So i6/4 (Cm/G in C minor) becomes Im/5. This is what I teach. I don't care if it is standard because we don't READ RNs in charts most of the time. When the chords are diatonic VII7 tells me all I need to know even if I'm in an unfamiliar key, like G-flat. When the music get more complicated letter chords tell me how the chord relates to other local keys in the circle of fifths - RNs don't.

I frequently use lower case Romans for minor chords, but I'm just as likely to use upper case and know from the key whether it's major or minor but when a piece is modulating, Romans make life harder rather than easier.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/03/1205:34 PM

I didn't get to this yesterday. Since I saw one answer, that being of using a variety of things for a variety of situations or angles. I think that is the direction I'm going personally.

Roman numerals themselves: I understand that they describe function related to the place a chord has in key - function meaning a role. For example the V chord is the "dominant", and it plays a given role, and has a strong feel to it in that role. Or if in C major we have D G7 C, then if I see D as V/V going to V going to I, then I'm seeing the strong movements that the function of a V entails. It has meaning. Further, the RN's help me keep track where are are roles which are related to these kinds of relationships.

Other times stuff is happening within music that is outside of roles, and if we still try to give RN names to everything, we tie ourselves into knots giving roles when maybe there aren't any. It's sort of saying "the butcher of the lawyer of the sister whose husband is the uncle of my great grandfather's mistress" (V/V/V/V/V/V/V/IV....). rather than saying "Bob". Dm is "Bob".

My background is an old pre-Kodaly solfege learned in some primary grade. Major scales were Do to Do, and (natural) minor scales were La to La. Therefore key signatures and relative majors/minors are second nature. I also learned that it gave me a sense of function: "So Do" implies the V-I movement; Ti Do also implies part of V-I. This also has a danger, because "Ti" is also part of IIIm (iii). --- In a minor scale, however, I would hear V-Im as "Mi La" since the tonic was La. When I worked with 4-part harmony, this presented a problem for hearing V-I in my head. It was disorienting, initially. Eventually I could use it, but minors are slower than majors if I do four part harmony while using my internal ear.

Eventually I realized that in my old system, I am continually within a dual awareness. While working in minor keys I was simultaneously aware of the relative major. When hearing La Mi for V-Im, I was also aware that those notes were VI(m)-IIIm in the relative major. Except music doesn't tend to go along that path so it doesn't serve me in the 21st century. I'd do fine among the monks of the Middle Ages.

----The alternative notation where you see Eb in Cm in terms of the parallel (tonic) major, also has a duality. The suggestion here is to see Eb as bIII because Em is the IIIm of C major. It reflects what is probably a more common reality in music, where majors and minors shimmer back and forth. You could argue that Cm has its own signature, which also gives us that Eb, but often music modulates and we don't have these signatures. Plus in music you'll have music that has modulated to C major and then the composer makes the same thing play in C minor because it sounds cool that way. This systems works.

----I would also want to use other systems, for seeing other aspects of music. Sarnecki has added figured bass as well as movable Do solfege, and also letter name chords. (I've been tempted to learn to play from figured bass the way they did in the Baroque age).

I was close to abandoning Solfege. Then last night I did an exercise that featured bass notes (not written that great, I suspect), RN's "teaching" sequence, and three starting notes in the soprano that boxed everything in. Finally I wrote solfege names underneath each bass notes / RN - i.e. if they had a V6, then "Ti" was in the bass - V has So Ti Re, I knew I had So and Re available. Once I had that written down I could get at a melody. It was a reference I needed, and it gave me a particular orientation.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/03/1206:01 PM

I like lots of different angles.

I don't associate roman numerals with function. Maybe partly because I don't consciously hear function; maybe because the way we learned them, we just used them as labels for chords. For example in the key of C major, if I met (say) G7 Em7 I would happily call the G7 "V7" even though it's not functioning in the usual V7-I cadence.

This is similar to how "dominant seventh" chord just means, to me, any major triad with a minor seventh added. For example, in C minor, I would be happy to call B7 a dominant seventh chord. I gather that major triad with minor seventh is often just called a seventh chord (or is it seven chord)? I'm willing to use that too, but it's awkward in what I've been writing about. I've tried to say "types of seventh chords" when I mean the whole set of possibilities for the seventh in a chord: diminished, minor, or major. And then I've tended to avoid calling the dominant seventh chord anything, because plain "seven" could be confusing in context, but I know that for some people "dominant seventh" has the additional connotation that the chord is acting as V7 and leading to the tonic. So I've tended to refer to them by symbol, e.g. VII7.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/03/1209:08 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/03/1210:27 PM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Thanks. "Still" no.5, ha, I was still on no.4.

that's kind ... thanks.

Not sure if you saw it ealier, PS88, but I did post some further analysis re: content on this movement. Are we still concerned about this. There has been some serious side discussion on this movement, so may have lost track myself.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/03/1210:30 PM

Wait, you say "further analysis re: content on this movement". *Which* movement? Sonatina 5, movement 1? or some other movement?

(The way you worded your response to my post got me confused again about which movement you're referring to.)

I'm going to have to go back to where I was last following the analysis in detail (way back at the beginning of sonatina 4) and follow it all in detail. Otherwise nothing is going to make sense. I thought I would take a pass on sonatina #4 and pick up again with #5, but I can't: I'm too confused without #4.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/03/1210:37 PM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

I'm going to have to go back to where I was last following the analysis in detail (way back at the beginning of sonatina 4) and follow it all in detail. Otherwise nothing is going to make sense. I thought I would take a pass on sonatina #4 and pick up again with #5, but I can't: I'm too confused without #4.

Calm down ... no you don't need to do that.

Look back at around noon today. You will see that I posted something about where the material was coming from in the recap and development (no. 5, movement 1.)

It was just after this that you asked about which sonata and movement. Since you did not see my response -- assuming you did not see it, as you later asked again -- I kind of figured you also did not see my brilliant content analysis.

You only need to go back to noon today. Nothing like last week or anything.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/03/1210:51 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/04/1202:30 AM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

I like lots of different angles.I don't associate roman numerals with function. Maybe partly because I don't consciously hear function; maybe because the way we learned them, we just used them as labels for chords. For example in the key of C major, if I met (say) G7 Em7 I would happily call the G7 "V7" even though it's not functioning in the usual V7-I cadence.

I’m particularly exhausted right now. At work, my “real” teaching, I am a victim of my own success. Day after day I have had such a full schedule that I have had zero time, not even a few spare seconds, to look at posts and answer. So this may not make sense, but I think I am on track.

Don’t lock yourself into a narrow definition of function. If you are in the key of C, as an example, then you are 100% OK calling a G7 a V7, even if it does not go to where you want it to go in a textbook way. Now, let’s assume for a moment that your G7 does this:

G B D F--->>G# B D E, and so G7 to E7/G#. Admittedly we are in flux here. Is it a V7? Well, if we are going to do this, G7, E7/G#, Am, Dm, G7, C (END). Now, is our G7 chord a V7 when it slips to E7/G#? It very much depends on whether you are looking at a big picture or a small one. The G7 is essentially going to C, but it gets side-tracked by slipping to E7/G#, V7 of VI.

With very traditional notation, V6/5 of vii. I prefer V7/3 of VIm or III7/3 to VIm.

Really, any way you slice it, we have this G7 moving to Am by slipping first to E7, just a peek-a-boo modulation described as secondary dominance, but if we stop calling G7 a V7 just because we are sliding to E7 then to Am, then suddenly we have to rename it as something in the key of Am, and that gets nasty in RNs.

We would have to then think bVII7 to V7/3 to Im in the key of A minor. G7 E7 Am.

Insane? Of COURSE it is! So there is a blurring of RN names, labels, and function. If we can’t call a G7, in the key of C, simply V7 just because it is not going to C or I, it gets hopelessly complicated.

My suggestion is that you think that music is all about “context”, and “function” is just one way to try to predict or analyze chords in context. So if, for example, you learn that B D F Ab is a VIIdim7 in the key of C or C minor, it does not mean that you are not thinking of it as nothing more than an isolated chord with no logical place to go to. You expect it to go where it wants to go, and then if it goes somewhere else, you change gears, decide whether you like it, play around with it, then LATER figure out what to call it.

Example: B D F Ab--->>> C D F Ab. Now you just moved from Bdim7 to Dm7b5/C, a very complicated way to explain that we just slid from a fully diminished chord to a half-diminished, and we used absolutely perfect spelling. Now, is our Bdim7 still VIIdim7? The answer is tricky. If it is just a detour, and a couple measures later we get to C or Cm, it is still the VIIdim7. If through some kind of sneaky slithering a composer slides to another key, we can STILL say that we started on a VIIdim7. The important thing to remember is that RNs can deceive us about where we are going, while just using LCs may give us everything we need to know, just by seeing where the chords are going.

Thus context is everything, and no matter what chord we have, we have to consider where we came from, which tells us how we got someplace, and why, then where we are going next. This explains another thing, namely how musicians know how to spell chords with LCs, which themselves do not demand any specific spelling.

Quote:

This is similar to how "dominant seventh" chord just means, to me, any major triad with a minor seventh added. For example, in C minor, I would be happy to call B7 a dominant seventh chord. I gather that major triad with minor seventh is often just called a seventh chord (or is it seven chord)?

No matter what key we are in, if I see B7 moving to E or Em, to me it IS a V7 chord. But if we are in the key of C, and somehow we land on B7, I would like to know how we got there. If it was proceeded by an E or Em chord, I would feel it as a V7, but then if that B7 does something like opening up to an D#m chord (German 6th so spelled B D# F# Gx), then I would hear it as bVI(#6) to Im/5. So which is it? Well, in this case it is sort of both, isn’t it? We came from something like E, so B7 is V7 to that. But where it is going, to D#m, it becomes something else. Can a chord be two things at once?

In my world, yes, and that “shape-shifting chord” is how my mind processes the concept of “pivot chord”. To me a “pivot chord” is something comes from somewhere very logical, then goes somewhere cool but not totally expected.

If we go B7/D#, Em, B7, D#m/B, A#7, D#m, then our B7 wore two hats.

Now, am I writing nonsense that only makes sense to me because of over-exhaustion? Let me know.

I teach a G7 chord as a “generic 7 chord” that MAY be a V7 but that could be other things, such as something like this: E7, G7, Bb7, Db7, E7, something Debussy would do!

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/04/1202:54 AM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Please let me know if you find any mistakes in the above.

Here are some more ideas from the above:

It highlights the small vocabulary of chords/harmonies used in the music we've been working with. How many augmented major seven chords have we met, compared to the number of dominant seventh or even diminished triads that we've met?

To me, it suggests a use for the exam-type question, about what type of scale contains a given chord. Suppose you've fallen in love with Ebaug(maj7) and want to write some music containing it. If you can figure out that this appears in the C harmonic minor and C melodic minor scales as bIIIaug(maj7), you have an idea of which notes you might try to build around it to create a melody and a harmony. Maybe real composers never think that way, and just look for things that sound good, or think in terms of "Eb G B D, what would lead up to that and what would lead away from it" and then later discover that the whole thing is feeling like C minor. Anyway, just an idea. This is the kind of way I think, but I am miles, nay, parsecs, away from being a real composer.

Let me present a different way to examine minor. We know, from experience, that we can consider b3 as fixed, but we can have b6, 6, b7 or 7.

Now, let’s build a hybrid minor scale:

C D Eb F G----Ab A Bb B C. This is what music really does. Using this idea, our “VII” chord is the most unpredictable, with all these possiblities:

1) B D F Ab2) Bb D F Ab3) Bb D F A4) B D F A

So we end up with Bdim7, Bb7, Bbmaj7, and Bm7b5.

The most used will be 1, in minor. But 2, Bb7, will show up as V7 or bIII (Eb), secondary dominance. 3 would be unusual, but if you go Bbmaj7 to Bdim7 to Cm, then it works. And 4, Bm7b5 to Bdim7 to Cm works.

I think by this time the RN system has become insane, but theoretically you have:

VIIdim7, bVII7, bVIImaj7, VIIm7b5. When things get this complex, I start moving to LCs and drop RNs, but that is where your exploration is leading you to. It might be good to remember that all your triads are CONTAINED in four note, stacked chords.

I would start out in a key, like C minor, then do this:

C E G B (for the letters)

Then:

C Eb G BbC Eb G B

For what a Im chord can do when a 4th note is added. You will probably find out that some of these are “theoretically” in some form of a minor scale, but many will clearly sound as if they do not belong and would appear in some kind of modulation. An example:

F A C E is possible in Cm, VImaj7. But it will probably do something like this;

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/04/1210:42 AM

What I was clearly missing was in understanding whether in major or minor as the 7th pertain to both.

Seems we will need more than just the 7th though, to determine major or minor.

This is where I think I can now make more sense of where the other chords may help.

When G7 closes into C major we're in major. If it closes into C minor we're in minor.

When there isn't a cadence there's always a key signature. In major there are fewer accidentals. In minor we can expect the seventh to be sharpened frequently and the sixth occasionally.

In C major we're more likley to see F#'s where the piece is moving into dominant or Bb's where it's going into subdominant. Look at the G's, the dominant in C, if they're natural the we're in C. C, F and G will figure prominently in the bass. Note where these letters occur in the circle of fifths in relation to the key signature.

If the G's are sharpened we're most likely in A minor and the bass will feature E, A and D. Note where these letters occur in the circle of fifths in relation to the key signature.

In a minor key, because the sixth and seventh are often sharpened, the minor chords in the circle of fifths frequently occur as major and the diminished triad on the second (the seventh in the relative major key) can occur as a minor chord.

Conversely, we can use the local chords to build a scale. M35 uses C, F#, A, D and M36 uses Bb, D, G. That's A, Bb, C, D, F#, G. What key features Bb and F#? G minor is the only one.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/04/1210:52 AM

Gary, thank you for those two information-packed posts. I'm going to need to print them out and try them out at the piano, to listen to the progressions and see if I can hear what you're talking about. I can follow what you're saying on paper, but I want to see if I can start understanding some of this aurally.

One problem I struggle with when playing progressions is finding appropriate voicing. Just playing the chords in root position often sounds just like random jumping around to me. But it's probably a good exercise for me to look for some kind of voicing like "nearest neighbour (except the bass line can move in big jumps)", or something like that.

Originally Posted By: Gary D.

No matter what key we are in, if I see B7 moving to E or Em, to me it IS a V7 chord. But if we are in the key of C, and somehow we land on B7, I would like to know how we got there. If it was proceeded by an E or Em chord, I would feel it as a V7, but then if that B7 does something like opening up to an D#m chord (German 6th so spelled B D# F# Gx), then I would hear it as bVI(#6) to Im/5. So which is it? Well, in this case it is sort of both, isn’t it? We came from something like E, so B7 is V7 to that. But where it is going, to D#m, it becomes something else. Can a chord be two things at once?

I quoted the whole paragraph because it didn't seem to make sense to pull the following two phrases out of context, but what really jumped out at me were these:

Originally Posted By: Gary D.

If it was proceeded by an E or Em chord, I would feel it as a V7,

and

Originally Posted By: Gary D.

[...different progression...]then I would hear it as bVI(#6) to Im/5

I don't really understand what it means to hear a chord or progression "as" something. That is, I hear the chords, and sometimes they sound like coming to a resting point (though sometimes they don't, even when theory tells me I should hear them that way, or they sound at rest to me even when theory tells me they shouldn't), but I don't have any names for what I'm hearing. I can't imagine in my head the sound of a V7-I, or a bVI(#6)-Im/5. I can identify them on paper, and trace which notes are moving where, e.g. is the tritone resolving in or out, but I don't know if I really hear that, and, more significantly, I'm not even sure I hear them as particularly distinctive or different from each other. (But this is why I need to take your posts to the piano and listen to them.)

(I guess actually I can sort of hear certain progressions, because when I play them they sound familiar. But I don't readily pick them out when I hear them in music. They all go by too fast, and the most I can pick out is "that sounded complete.")

I don't think I hear tonic very well, so at any given chord, I don't really have a sense of "this is the home chord" or "this is not the home chord". So I don't really have a feeling of "aha, that progression just arrived at I!" And even less do I hear "aha, tonic chord used to be THIS pitch, and now we've arrived at what sounds like a tonic chord again, but it's a DIFFERENT pitch (change of key or tonality)". Also I don't really hear root, or bass, very well. I think I tend to hear the top note of a chord, unless I pay very close attention -- or if it's something where the bass line is being played by a distinctive instrument, e.g. bass in a band, or double-bass in an orchestra.

Over on the TIM RICHARDS - Improvising Blues Piano Book 1, I've written about some beginning experiences in listening, and trying to understand my successes in terms of small component steps of (in that case) the overall skill of "recognizing 12-bar blues". (I guess it might seem silly in one sense, and lots of people just recognize the 12-bar blues as an overall gestalt, but I don't trust myself to do that, and I want to understand them in detail, and I like the idea of learning by small steps, so I like having found all those component steps.) Anyway, I feel like there's some set of small steps of recognition that sometime I'll be able to identify (and succeed at) that will eventually add up to progress at complicated tasks like hearing something as "V7 going to I" or "bVI(#6) going to Im/5".

Oh well, this is just my usual extended moan about my self-perceived lack of aural skills.

But I think I finally understand what "function" means. It means there's some sense of key or tonality, or brief tonicization of a note (as by a quick secondary dominant e.g. V7/V V7 I), and then the roman numeral for a chord is assigned according to that key. I guess that's a sort of paper definition (because I don't *hear* the sense of key, I just identify it by patterns of notes & accidentals & chords from the score).

That makes me think of a small component aural skill for learning to identify function aurally: I think I can hear the question and answer part of a phrase sometimes. For example, in Argentine tango music I can hear 2 measures opening, and 2 measures closing, over and over. So I could look at my Argentine tango sheet music and examine both the melody and the chords and see if there's a melodic or harmonic pattern to that 2+2 question-and-answer form. And then I would know that I can detect, in that context at least, a Im-V followed by a V-Im (I think that's what they're doing, and I think they're usually in a minor key...). (Actually, I think it's 4+4, but I'm always a bit confused as to the count in Argentine tango because the normal pace is to step on every other beat, and I go back and forth between counting beats and counting the normal pace of steps. Once I've picked which system I'm counting in, it's not confusing at all, but it's interesting because sometimes I'm counting in one system and, say, the teacher of a workshop is counting in the other system.)

Incidentally, I only think Argentine tango is usually in a minor key from playing through a bunch of Argentine tango sheet music and noticing they all seemed to be minor. I don't actually register "this is minor" when I'm listening to them. Although maybe if I found one in a major key I would register "wow, this sounds really different!" I'll have to see if I can find some in major and minor keys and see if I can hear a difference -- see there's another small component skill for the major skill of recognizing major or minor key pieces.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/04/1211:11 AM

Oh, thinking about the Argentine tango Im-V followed by V-Im. Being able to hear those as question and answer doesn't really mean I can hear Im-V and V-Im. It would perhaps mean I can hear "from start to something else" and "from something else back to start". And actually, it doesn't even really mean that. To tell what I'm really able to hear, I'd want some music, that, say, went Im-III and then III-Im, and listen to find out if that sounds different to me than Im-V and V-Im. And then also some music that went, say Im-V followed by V-III (or anything not Im), and see if that sounded different again, and/or like it didn't come back to start.

I can hear where the phrase ends are coming in Argentine tango, though, and that's something that (as far as I can tell) a lot of people in the places I usually dance don't hear at all, so I feel really good about that aspect of hearing, even if I have no idea how it is I can hear it or how to teach it to other people in any way other than "listen to a lot of Argentine tango music, and then listen some more and practice counting off 8 measures and listen to what's happening". (Or maybe they do hear the phrase ends, they just COMPLETELY ignore them in their dancing.)

Actually, I feel not just good, but really really fantastic about being able to hear the phrase ends, because being able to hear them is a big part of leading Argentine tango in a musical way, that followers really enjoy.

So maybe the followers are hearing the phrase ends subliminally, because they react to that aspect of my leading with pleasure, and tell me I dance musically (as well as other musical/rhythmic aspects of my dancing). (I'm a woman, but I both lead and follow.)

OK, back to our regularly scheduled sonatina analysis. Although in a way this all connects because I'd like to be able to approach the sonatina analysis more aurally, and write about what I can hear more than what I can find on paper, or use what I can hear to drive what I then look for on paper.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/04/1210:08 PM

F G C, subdominant tonic dominant, are adjacent to each other in the circle of fifths. Tick counterclockwise from the tonic, you get the subdominant. Tick clockwise, you get the dominant.

Once you're at, say, F, you could play the key change game again. Tick counterclockwise, you're at the subdominant of F, which is Bb. Tick clockwise, and you're at the dominant of F, which is our original friend C.

Do you have a picture of the circle of fifths? There are lots of them, e.g. at Wikipedia. I found it helpful to practice working it out and drawing it for myself, after I had got the concept from looking at a picture.

Pick any major key on the circle of fifths; the subdominant is one tick counterclockwise and the dominant is one tick rclockwise.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/04/1210:12 PM

Keys that are adjacent to each other on the circle of fifths turn out to have key signatures which only differ by one accidental. So changing key by just one tick at a time around the circle of fifths -- which essentially by definition turns out to be the same as changing key into the subdominant or the dominant -- means that you're changing to a key that has almost all the same notes as your starting key.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/05/1212:44 AM

I'm looking where Greener had a question. I read the sentence (highlighted) a couple of times too.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

In C major we're more likely to see F#'s where the piece is moving into dominant or Bb's where it's going into subdominant. Look at the G's, the dominant in C, if they're natural the we're in C. C, F and G will figure prominently in the bass. Note where these letters occur in the circle of fifths in relation to the key signature.

Richard is referring to the notes C, F and G. These are notes 1, 4, and 5, and also the root notes of chords I, IV, V. The "circle of fifths" represents a relationship. C is V of F major/minor (C7=>F or Fm). F is also IV of C major. G is V of C major or minor (G7=> C or Cm). This is the kind of relationship Richard is talking about. "Fifths" because there is a relationship of fifths and fourths (inverse of fifths) among these three notes. Since you play by ear, you will already have this in your ear and fingers.

I would like to demystify this circle of fifths further. Please do google and print out the circle of fifths chart and take it to the piano. Then instead of trying to remember any of its information, compare it with what you already know about music in your ear and fingers. For example, you will see C on the chart, and clockwise, G, D, A.... These are the major keys having 0, 1, 2, 3 sharps in the signature. They are also a fifth apart. Going counter-clockwise you will see C, F, Bb, Eb, which are also the major keys having 0, 1, 2, 3 flats. You also know how these notes relate to each other in "fifths" for the V-I progressions etc. (You already wrote this).

I read about the circle of fifths after I already saw these patterns in music. I illustrated what is felt in the ear and the hands. Since you already have this, I might use the diagram to confirm known patterns, rather than needing to use this as a reference.

For minor keys:The notes in the natural minor key will be the same notes as those in the relative major key, which is a minor third down from the natural minor - that's how the key signatures work for natural minor. Thus the key of A minor uses the key signature and same notes as for the key of C major. The key of C minor uses the key signature of Eb minor and uses the same notes. Then for notes number 6 and 7, these may be higher (C harmonic minor has B natural, not Bb (7), C melodic minor has A nat & B nat (^ & 7).

The other more logical way which doesn't depend on key signatures is to realize the C major and C minor have the same notes, except that 3 is always lowered in all forms of the minor (C,D,E,F,G vs. C,D,Eb,F,G). Note 7 is usually identical since the F# is raised much of the time as the leading note. Therefore the V7 chord of C major and C minor will both be G7, and you will see note 7 with an accidental in minor. That G, of course, is also your "circle of fifths" note.

I suggest that you take this chart to the piano, and explore it working backward, by using what you already know, and look for patterns, which it represents.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/05/1202:21 AM

Some people may have seen the two posts that I wrote which goes into that chart, which I have deleted, so I shouldn't leave it at that. I went by the first example, and expected the others to follow suit. When they didn't I started editing my post, but it was turning into a mess. Since people will have already studied that chart, I'm going to write just a bit. I will use ONLY the first example:

C: (Bb) Eb [Ab]

The key of C minor uses the key signature of Eb major (relative major), which has Bb, Eb, Ab in the key signature. That is why those notes are listed. In a minor scale, notes 6 & 7 are variable. I.e.C, D, Eb, F, G, Ab, Bb, CC, D, Eb, F, G, Ab, B, CC, D, Eb, F, G, A, Bb Care all versions that you might see and hear. That explains why (Bb) and [Ab] were written with parentheses or brackets.

The chart chooses the notes "Bb F# [Eb]" so the pattern is lost, and that's what makes the chart confusing, even if none of the information is actually wrong (there is a version of a G minor scale where we see Bb, F#, Eb.).

Depending on what your key signature is, because of the place a given scale has in the music (modulating etc.), accidentals will give you clues at a glance because of patterns. Chords will also give you clues, especially if you are used to hearing them. If you see G7 and then Cm or C, then a key of C minor or C major are likely. Etc.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/05/1208:28 AM

Dominant ... G, subdominant ... F ... yes and can hear this easily as well. ie. C7 wants to resolve, of course to F, G# is pulling to G. Is this what you mean?

I believe that G# is a typo for F#, yes?

Originally Posted By: Gary D.

After decades of teaching this I can't follow your chart at all. You really need to rework it.

Sorry the information was confusing. This would be much easier in person with a piano and a whiteboard!

Going back to my post I was trying to establish which minor key we're in from the prevailing key signature (the non-natural notes in the current measures). If we create a scale from adjacent chords such V7 and I, which often occur close together, we get 5-7-2-4 and 1-3-5, which is a scale without 6.

Looking only at the accidentals (key sig) G7-Cmin will give Eb; D7-Gmin will give Bb and F#. I wanted a way of quickly getting from the key sig to the minor key. In sharped keys the "uncharacteristic" sharp will be the seventh and in flatted keys the "uncharacteristic" flat will be the third.

Ex. 1. In C minor, the Eb is uncharacteristic without a Bb so must be the flatted third. Ex. 2. In G minor, Bb is "uncharacteristic" when there's an F# - so it's the third. F# is uncharacteristic when there's a flat so it's the seventh. Ex. 3. In B minor you'd find an A#. That would be uncharacteristic without a D#, so it's the seventh. Ex. 4. In F minor you'll have two flats, Ab and Bb. Since E will most likely be natural (as the raised seventh) the Ab would be uncharacteristic so must be the third.

I don't really want to use a separate chart because knowing the circle of fifths/key sigs allows us to recognise the "uncharacteristic" accidental and establish the key from it.

Originally Posted By: Greener

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Note where these letters occur in the circle of fifths in relation to the key signature.

Can you put this another way? Sorry, not clear on what you mean by this.

Ah!

Since I was 10 or 11 and over a decade away from ever hearing about a circle of fifths I noticed a pattern in the chords I was using on guitar in any particular song/key.

If I'm in G major I get a box with G major at the centre and the common chords around it. (The bottom row also doubles as a flatted majors (A min/Ab maj etc) for rock/blues.)

sig: 0#-- 1#-- 2#Maj: C -- G -- DMin: A -- E -- B

This can extend to a "circle" of fifths but for me it's a "ribbon" from Cb to G# though I only normally use a 'nine box grid' at any one time.

Top row: key sig from 7 flats to 7 sharpsSecond row: Major chords from Cb to G# in fifthsThird row: Minor chords from Ab min to E# min

For minor keys I get a larger range of adjacent chords and it doesn't extend so easily to a circle/ribbon but the principal is the same and once I'm familiar with the area transposition on the fly for an unfamiliar singer is a breeze. The top row is Major/aug chords, middle row is minor/major chords chords and bottom row is Dim/minor chords. For E minor:

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/05/1203:53 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Going back to my post I was trying to establish which minor key we're in from the prevailing key signature (the non-natural notes in the current measures).

Looking only at the accidentals (key sig) G7-Cmin will give Eb; D7-Gmin will give Bb and F#. I wanted a way of quickly getting from the key sig to the minor key. In sharped keys the "uncharacteristic" sharp will be the seventh and in flatted keys the "uncharacteristic" flat will be the third.

Ex. 1. In C minor, the Eb is uncharacteristic without a Bb so must be the flatted third. Ex. 2. In G minor, Bb is "uncharacteristic" when there's an F# - so it's the third. F# is uncharacteristic when there's a flat so it's the seventh. Ex. 3. In B minor you'd find an A#. That would be uncharacteristic without a D#, so it's the seventh. Ex. 4. In F minor you'll have two flats, Ab and Bb. Since E will most likely be natural (as the raised seventh) the Ab would be uncharacteristic so must be the third.

OK, beginning to get this, I think.

I've got an arsenal of key indicators now -- stacks of documents and charts about my office -- which is going to help in solidifying this as it is applied in further analysis.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/05/1205:05 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Sorry the information was confusing. This would be much easier in person with a piano and a whiteboard!

When you think about it, the obstacles we face trying to teach this way are huge. Some days I just give up. Yesterday I gave up. But I think one problem is that we try to cover too many subjects in one thread. This is supposed to be about analyzing music, and when we get to things like circle of 5ths or different kinds of minor, I think we would be better off doing those things in other threads.

Quote:

Going back to my post I was trying to establish which minor key we're in from the prevailing key signature (the non-natural notes in the current measures). If we create a scale from adjacent chords such V7 and I, which often occur close together, we get 5-7-2-4 and 1-3-5, which is a scale without 6.

You lose me with terms like “prevailing key signature”. I don’t know what that means. Either there is a key signature, or there isn’t. And if there is a key signature, that actually reflects the key we are at the moment – or it doesn’t.

In other words, if the key signature says 3 flats, we know that signature is used for two “keys”: Eb major and C minor. Now, whether or not the music actually FOLLOWS the notes specified by those key signatures is quite another matter.

Quote:

Looking only at the accidentals (key sig) G7-Cmin will give Eb; D7-Gmin will give Bb and F#. I wanted a way of quickly getting from the key sig to the minor key. In sharped keys the "uncharacteristic" sharp will be the seventh and in flatted keys the "uncharacteristic" flat will be the third.

Please let’s not mix key signatures with keys. They are not the same. At any moment we can be in any key, and it is quite possible to write in keys with not key signature. Furthermore, we all know that modulations put us into different keys, but those keys are not shown with key signatures. In fact, in my opinion using key signatures to determine key is a crutch, and in complicated music that is useless.

We simply have to know our major scales/keys. If we know them, then explaining minor is simple. If we don’t, nothing is going to help.

If you combine Cm with G7, you get this: C D Eb F G ***B C.

You can get there instantly by using the C major scale, then lowering only 3. That, in fact, is the simplest minor scale we have, melodic, which is also used a great deal in minor. C D Eb F G A B C. Only flat 3, bam, you have melodic minor.

So viewed in that manner, melodic minor, flatting only 3, is the simplest minor scale to use when thinking in a parallel or tonic manner, thus parallel/tonic minor. C major and C minor.

For natural minor, there are two ways to get there, and I would suggest that both have their uses.

1) Start with major, then flat 3 6 and 7. Thus C D Eb F G Ab Bb C. This principle is especially obvious when starting in C, but it works in any key. And this is how to find parallel/tonic natural minor.

2) Take any major scale, then simply start on the 6th note, so C D E F G A B C becomes A B C D D F G A. The weakness there is that it may not be easy to get to A minor that way if you are not starting from C major as a reference point. But if you start from A B C# D E F# G# A, then A B C D E F G A is easy to slide to, just lowering 3 6 and 73) The point is melodic minor is easy to spot because it is a major scale with 3 lowered. And natural minor is easy to spot because it uses the exact same notes as one of our major scales. That’s why it is so important to have major scales solid, in all keys.

Quote:

Ex. 1. In C minor, the Eb is uncharacteristic without a Bb so must be the flatted third. Ex. 2. In G minor, Bb is "uncharacteristic" when there's an F# - so it's the third. F# is uncharacteristic when there's a flat so it's the seventh. Ex. 3. In B minor you'd find an A#. That would be uncharacteristic without a D#, so it's the seventh. Ex. 4. In F minor you'll have two flats, Ab and Bb. Since E will most likely be natural (as the raised seventh) the Ab would be uncharacteristic so must be the third.

Again, I have the same problem. I don’t doubt that you are right. I have no doubts about your knowing this stuff. But it just seems like backwards logic. There is a reason why I have not yet mentioned harmonic minor. And that reason is that the augmented 2nd is the elephant in the room. If you see Ab B and even SUSPECT you may be in a minor key, ½ step or a semitone above that B gives you the tonic. C is the answer, so C minor. And F G# screams A minor, same reason. The augmented 2nd announces the leading tone, top of the aug2, and so the tonic has to be A.

So skipping harmonic minor, which is unique and explains itself by sound and spelling, you don’t have to talk about “characteristic” or “uncharacteristic”. Melodic minor is 100% consistent and easy to spot, because only one note in a major scale has been lowered, and the moment you get a V7 chord, it screams where it wants to go to. So if G7 is most likely to go to C major, and you see a C major scale, almost, but with Eb, lowered third, it’s obvious that you are in C melodic minor. And you don’t need a key signature to tell you that.

Natural minor explains itself. If you are something that is purely diatonic, sticking to that kind of minor and never using anything else, the notes in the scale will conform to a major scale and then you see that it goes from the 6th degree to the 6th degree.

And when we start linking minor scales, all the different forms, to the circle of 5ths, I think we are in two completely different universes.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/05/1210:32 PM

Originally Posted By: Gary D.

When you think about it, the obstacles we face trying to teach this way are huge. Some days I just give up. Yesterday I gave up. But I think one problem is that we try to cover too many subjects in one thread. This is supposed to be about analyzing music, and when we get to things like circle of 5ths or different kinds of minor, I think we would be better off doing those things in other threads.

This is an interesting point, Gary. The challenge I think, is in containing such a universally expansive topic -- music -- within the scope of the analysis at hand.

In looking back at all the study threads -- at least the ones I have participated in, beginning with the Moonlight Sonata in mid August -- we have covered a tremendous amount of ground and not all pertaining to composition analysis. The very one we are looking at now -- Clementi Sonatine No. 5, Movement 1 -- has two full pages of discussion so far, and most to do with theory outside of composition analysis.

This is simply an observation. I for one have learned and am continuing to learn a tremendous amount. I am not sure how or if we want to change anything. At least we know where all the information resides. But, your point I think is a good one for consideration, Gary. Else, we start venturing in too many directions ... agreed.

Originally Posted By: Gary D.

In fact, in my opinion using key signatures to determine key is a crutch, and in complicated music that is useless.

Precisely, and I think we are all in agreement on that. Hence, why this is an important aspect of these analysis.

Yes, it would, but I have to intuitively figure out what “()” and “[]” mean. Furthermore, it puts the order of the notes in the scale in a theoretical order that makes no sense to me. Why 7 3 6? To what purpose? If a student is good enough at patterns to solve this little puzzle, that student is going to “get it” in just about any way we present it.

Here is what I see, but I can only work it out because I already know all the answers: Parentheses show degree 7. Brackets show degree 6. Degree 3 "is what it is". The parentheses show show a toggling 7, brackets show a toggling 6. It's all intellectual, in the wrong order. It's now how music works. I'm not even sure you did not make any mistakes. It's that artificial for me.

I would make a table, but I have NO idea how to do that here.

I would simply write the C scale, with the C minor scale directly below in the form that would follow the key signatures, thus major and natural minor.

I would join the 3rd, 6th, and 7th degrees with toggles. This is how I present parallel or tonic major/minor. I use the word parallel because I live in the US, but I also use trem tonic as the clearer term.

Until this concept is nailed down, I don't think we can explain key signatures. And until we explain key signatures, I don't think we can explain why music in minor keys does not always USE those key signatures, and why the 6th and 7th degrees came to be continually toggling between what they are in major and our purely natural minor for which key signatures came to be standardized for in the first place.

THEN I would explain that the 7th degree has to be raised about 50% of the time in tonal music because of the extreme importance of the dominant major chord or dominant 7 chord.

FINALLY I would explain how and why the harmonic minor scale came to be popular and where it appears most often (descending).

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/05/1211:26 PM

I want to clarify that this is not really my chart. I took what Richard wrote down, and made the other minor keys follow the same pattern as the first. I had to work out what (*) and [*] meant in the original, and could do so because I already understand how the music works. Since the minor keys were listed in a chart-like form, but according to different patterns, I wanted to give it consistency. I believe that I did previously write what (*) and [*] seemed to mean. I'm short of time and didn't want to explain it again.

Originally Posted By: Gary

I would simply write the C scale, with the C minor scale directly below in the form that would follow the key signatures, thus major and natural minor.

I think I've done that a few times in the past, including your other points. This time round I simply wanted to make sense out of an existing chart. There are several ways of introducing it. I remember a few days you suggested a kind of generic system that covers all possibilities from the view of parallel majors and minors (C major, C minor). I liked the possibility of getting away from relative majors and minors (which is how I first learned it).

Originally I suggested that the circle of fifths can go hand in hand with what you hear and feel at the keyboard, especially if you are a by ear player already, and that exploration would lead to the discovery of a number of patterns. I assume those ideas were not considered useful since there was no response. That, rather than a reworking of the chart, would constitute my own ideas.

Quote:

I'm not even sure you did not make any mistakes. It's that artificial for me.

I'm rather sure that there are no mistakes. But I had to take a few steps in checking it since it's not intuitive, and I took the whole thing to the piano and played each minor scale to double check. Redoing the chart was a good exercise for me in strengthening what I already know, from a different angle.

Addendum:This is how I understood the symbolism of (*) and [*] in Richard's chart, in case I didn't write it before.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/05/1211:46 PM

Originally Posted By: keystring

Originally I suggested that the circle of fifths can go hand in hand with what you hear and feel at the keyboard, especially if you are a by ear player already, and that exploration would lead to the discovery of a number of patterns. I assume those ideas were not considered useful since there was no response. That, rather than a reworking of the chart, would constitute my own ideas.

I've found in useful, KS. I've printed the chart and I'm working with it as suggested. Sorry for not responding. Responding now. Yes useful, thanks.

Everything in fact I find is useful. The trouble I am having is in keeping up with it all. The pace of teaching and topic matter is beyond my capacity to absorb. So, I'm selective.

It is all good though. Judging by the amount of viewers on these threads, I'm certain I am not alone in this opinion.

THIS is the principle. It is not a circle, it is not a diagram, and it’s not a trick. In a mythical world all players would know all keys equally well. In fact, they would be born with this knowledge. It would be a given. Perfect world.

In THIS world people have their favorite keys, and you will notice an incredible difference in people who depend mostly on notation compared to ear players. Ear players have no idea why playing with all black keys would be harder than playing only the white ones, and from a physical and pure sound POV, they are right on the money. Eb minor with six flats? All these people know is that, BAM, you play all the black notes, stick in F and B and off you go improving your heart out. Comfortable for the hand.

The ear players don’t think, “Well, I have to NAME all these black keys, and I have to use alphabetical order to make sure I SPELL my scale right, and that means that my B is going to have to be a Cb, and my scale has to be Eb F Gb Ab Bb Cb Db Eb, if I’m playing natural minor, and oh, if I change that Cb to C because it sounds cool, I have to invent a new freakin’ NAME for the minor scale.”

Ear players are spared all that nonsense, because it belongs to the world of NOTATION.

Now, the people who make Holy Books out of scores and who never write music themselves, never play by ear, these people are locked into a passive world where everything is explained with rules, everything has to have a name, and so on. And because they are DEPENDENT on notation, they can’t PLAY anything written in C# minor or Db or Eb minor because they can’t read the notes on the page.

And that’s how people get stuck for YEARS in the dismal “easy classics” books that never get much beyond about 1800 and keep you imprisoned in a “white” world where only a few sharps and flats appear now and then.

Now, with that in mind, think about some really REALLY famous “classical” pieces:

Note that only C# minor does not use all the black keys, but that is only the KEY signature. Since degre 6 is one that is raised a huge amount of the time, in C# minor A# appears frequently.

Now, why are all these guys writing music in “hard keys”? Because these keys are NOT hard. They are child’s play to play in. They are only hard to read in, thanks to our very bizarre notation system.

So my point is that you are totally on the right track. Forget about circles. Use your EAR. Where does B7 want to go? E or Em. But how easy is it to change E or Em into E7? Simple. Where does it want to go? A something. And A7 wants to go to D.

Now, you can round and round the “circle” like a robot, playing all dom7 chords, but what about something like this?

G7 C A7 D E7 A F7 Bb G7 C.

And that is CONSERVATIVE. Try playing any V7 I, any key, then leap to ANY V7 in any key and got to ITS I.

The idea is that every V7 chord has a destination, and exploring that gives you the circle counter-clockwise. But every I has a V7 that GOES to it, and exploring THAT gives you the circle going clockwise.

If you start using your ear and your sense of patterns, the diagram will turn out to be as useful as cement boots.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/06/1203:28 AM

Originally Posted By: keystring

I want to clarify that this is not really my chart. I took what Richard wrote down, and made the other minor keys follow the same pattern as the first. I had to work out what (*) and [*] meant in the original, and could do so because I already understand how the music works. Since the minor keys were listed in a chart-like form, but according to different patterns, I wanted to give it consistency. I believe that I did previously write what (*) and [*] seemed to mean. I'm short of time and didn't want to explain it again.

I understand. But if there is one thing about all minor scales that is generally considered to be the “determiner” of minor, it is the b3. I would always emphasize that, in all keys. I teach melodic minor the “default” minor scale because to get there, you simply change one note, 3 to b3, and then you have something that is much closer to what music tends to do in any musical style that “spotlights” a dominant or dominant 7. When I have more time, I can actually make this idea crystal clear in CPE Bach’s Solfeggio where there is not ONE Ab or Bb in the main theme, although it is in C minor. Then, when that then is transposed first to G minor and later to F minor, the same thing happens. You have a G scale with B flatted, thus again melodic minor. In F minor, only Eb is changed. This is what melodic minor IS, major with only one note lowered.

That’s one place to start. To use lowering to get to natural minor is anything but simple, because you have to lower the maximum number of notes, b3, b6 and b7, but you can approach natural minor from a completely different perspective, as a major scale starting on a different degree of that scale (6) and so creating a different feel.

Basic example:

D E F# G A B C# DB C# D E F# G A B

Melodic minor is easy although not diatonic or modal

Natural minor is easy AND it is BOTH diatonic and modal.

Should we define modal and diatonic???

Harmonic minor can be approached from either direction, starting with melodic but lowering 6, or starting with natural and raising 7.

The real point in all minor scales is that 6 and 7 are toggled.

Originally Posted By: Gary

I would simply write the C scale, with the C minor scale directly below in the form that would follow the key signatures, thus major and natural minor.

Originally Posted By: KS

I think I've done that a few times in the past, including your other points. This time round I simply wanted to make sense out of an existing chart. There are several ways of introducing it. I remember a few days you suggested a kind of generic system that covers all possibilities from the view of parallel majors and minors (C major, C minor). I liked the possibility of getting away from relative majors and minors (which is how I first learned it).

We can’t dodge the idea of minors as being both relative and tonic (parallel). When a piece switches from Eb to C minor, it is logical to think of C minor as Eb, reordered because of the key signature, then realize that 6 and 7 will often be raised. But when Eb moves to Eb minor, then it is much more logical to simply say that G will become Gb but that C and D may remain as they are OR may be lowered, according to what is going on harmonically.

Quote:

Originally I suggested that the circle of fifths can go hand in hand with what you hear and feel at the keyboard, especially if you are a by ear player already, and that exploration would lead to the discovery of a number of patterns. I assume those ideas were not considered useful since there was no response. That, rather than a reworking of the chart, would constitute my own ideas.

I know. I have one student who is weak in key signatures and who has a huge problem naming what kind of minor scale is going on. She is very weak in patterns. But I can always ask her “what goes to X”, meaning what is the V7 chord pushing towards any major or minor chord, and she nails that. I can say, “Where does this X7 want to go,” and she knows the answer. If I ask her to recite the circle of 5ths, she can’t do it, but when we run into CHORDS that are following it, she always gets it.

Now, note that we jumped from minor scales, how to make them or play them or recognize them to circle of 5ths. To me these things are totally UNRELATED while being learned, although musically they turn out to be connected in a million ways.

Turning back to minor, because I’m too tired to write anything else and have to be up early tomorrow, my presentation of scales goes far beyond separating major and minor. My idea is this:

C D Eb E F# F G Ab A Bb B C. That is almost a complete chromatic scale, and we are missing only C#/Db. Why do that?

Because we must at ALL times consider that 3 also toggles simply because in the key of C minor, C or C7 is VERY common to go to Fm, the chord. And it just gets STUPID to say, well, a C chord is not part of C minor. It is “secondary dominance” so not part of the minor. That is true, if you like that way of thinking.

If we take our most common chords, called primary, which are Cm, Fm and G, it is totally ordinary to have V7 chords to those chords going to them: C7 to Fm, D7 to G, G7 to Cm. E is in C7, F# is in D7, B is in G7. But it is also true that frequently F, not Fm, will be used as an alternate IV chord, so there is A. If you start off with natural minor, add raised 3, 6 and 7, then allow #4 for the D7 chord, you already have the above nearly complete chromatic scale. This also explains the SPELLING of the chromatic scale.

Finally Db appears in another chord, the Neapolitan, another stupid name, but you can see how easily you get to THAT chord by taking an Fm chord and raising the 5th.

F Ab C-->>F Ab Db.

So when you consider harmony, it gives you the complete chromatic scale and the default spelling for most common minor keys.

THIS is the world Bach, Mozart and Beethoven lived in, a world of chromatic shifts, and people like Chopin, Wagner, Mahler, and so on just took the same idea to the max. And for a bonus, it explains the enharmonic choices they make in chromatic runs, according to key.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/06/1208:22 AM

So much written overnight! I may have to start sleeping at work, or 'continue' as my boss would have it

Originally Posted By: Greener

The trouble I am having is where these (and other) chords may also fit within minor keys...

Suppose I have an F major triad.

I could be in D minor, I could be in F major, I could be in C major (not C minor). Is this correct? Are there others I could be in?

What I am trying to get my head around, is what is the least amount of information I would need to know in order to know what key I am in. Certainly, one F major triad would not be enough.

Would it be a number of chords that together, would mean the key could not be anything but?

What we're trying to do here is answer this question without bluntly saying go and learn the key signatures. We need a way to work while we're learning.

We have an F major triad. Looking at our circle of fifths we could be in F or any of the five adjacent keys, Bb or C major, G, D or A minor. We won't be in G maj or any further on the sharp side and we won't be Eb or any further on the flat side. We see from the grid (looking at it as notes now rather than chords) that if we're in Bb the E will be flattened. So we look at the E's to see if we're in Bb or F and the B's to see if we're in F or C. If we're in a minor key look for sharped sevenths, F#, C# or G# to suggest G, D or A minor. It's not too difficult to learn or work out what the sevenths are but using my three row ribbon rather than the two row circle, the seventh is a knight's move down and left on the third (diminished) row. In a minor key that might require a fourth row (yet another minor third down or three boxes left) but you can look for G, D and A on the top (major) row and look a knight's move down from there.

Sidenote: Using this grid is how I learned to associate notes in a scale with chords in a key (majors in the top row, sub-dom, tonic, dominant), minors in the second row (supertonic, sub-mediant, mediant) and diminished in the bottom row and noting the association of the diminished chord on the bottom left to the dominant seventh on the top right. I still find it easier, with remote keys, to find the flatted third (box above), or the sixth and seventh of a scale (box below and diagonally left) on this grid rather than 'knowing' the scale degrees. Whatever key we're in we're using one column to the left and one column to the right and if we ever move further we've usually modulated.

We have a key signature but it may be affected by local accidentals in the measure(s) being examined (combining to form what I laughingly call a 'prevailing' key sig). My list was not a good idea, especially being seen as a chart. Knowing key signatures is better and knowing that in minor the third gets flattened and the seventh get sharpened is all you need - not another chart.

We can also look at the bass and expect to see Bb, F and C if we're in F major or G, D and A if we're in D minor, etc. Again, we can see these in our circle of fifths.

The least amount of information you need is that which is enough to eliminate the five adjacent keys or reinforce the right one.

Without a V-I cadence the music may be deliberately ambiguous.____________________

Originally Posted By: Gary D.

But I think one problem is that we try to cover too many subjects in one thread. This is supposed to be about analyzing music, and when we get to things like circle of 5ths or different kinds of minor, I think we would be better off doing those things in other threads.

I know and appreciate what you're saying, Gary, but our prime objective here is not to analyse music - it was when we started on the Moonlight but it's not now - it is to look and see what weapons we're lacking in our analysing arsenal before we go back to such pieces as the Moonlight. The whole purpose of this thread, as far as I'm concerned, is to draw out these weaknesses and shore them up.

I wish I had the experience to do this more simply and the foresight to do this another way. Alas, I am not so gifted. I don't know where the next hole is going to be in the knowledge bucket.

On the face of it there are very few participants here but the number of views suggest we have many passive followers and while there aren't many asking the questions there are many benefitting from the answers and until they start objecting or falling away I don't see us as having strayed too far even though we've taken the scenic route.

Saying all these things in a number of ways, when we all explain our own understanding of a concept, is not creating confusion but seeing it from different viewpoints and it's doing two things: it is reinforcing the knowledge (and its importance), and it's increasing the possibility of the penny dropping for someone who may not be getting it.

You see things with a wealth of knowledge and experience, keystring is able to explain it to someone who may not yet have sufficient knowledge and PianoStudent88 is able to explain it to someone doesn't "hear" the concept.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/06/1212:10 PM

PianoStudent88 is able to explain it to someone doesn't "hear" the concept.

That makes me very happy, to hear it described that way. I sometimes feel incredibly stupid for not being able to hear most of this very clearly.

Today I was listening to a Baroque concerto on the radio and they came to the chords at the end of a phrase, and I thought "clearly minor." But if you play me chords in isolation, I have to think very hard to tell if they're major or minor, and I don't feel secure in my answer. If you play me a major scale first though, then the tonic minor chord played after that sounds clearly minor (and the tonic major chord sounds clearly major). However, a few months ago the Mozart Prague Symphony was on the radio, and I listened to the entire symphony thinking "clearly minor." I looked it up... and it's in D major.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/06/1212:52 PM

So much written overnight! I may have to start sleeping at work, or 'continue' as my boss would have it

That’s funny! Strangely, I do WAY more writing on the days when I am teaching. I thrive on being busy.

Originally Posted By: Greener

The trouble I am having is where these (and other) chords may also fit within minor keys...Suppose I have an F major triad.

First of all, minor is always about 50 times harder than major, and for precisely the reasons we have all been talking about.

You HAVE to remember that in a minor key your IV chord can be either major or minor, and this is hugely important. I IV and V is the basis for just about all tonal music that is also harmonically simple.

So you have to do this, for a start:

F could be IV for either C or C minorF can be V for either Bb or Bb minor.F is I in F major

Quote:

I could be in D minor...

Yes, because F would be IIIm in D minor. But F s also IVm in A minor.

So you have:

1. F as V, in Bb

2. F as IV in C OR C minor

3. F as I in F

4. F as III in D minor

5. F as VI in A minor

6. F as VII in G

To me this feels hopelessly complicated, and it is not how I teach, but who knows. Maybe it will make sense to you!

This idea comes from the fact that you have major chords in a major key for I IV and V, so using C major as an example, C, F and G are very important. That’s obvious. And where they can go, these three major chords. But since ANY major chord can be I, IV or V in three different keys, you already have three answers.

Then in minor, again using C minor as an example, Eb, Ab and Bb are the major chords, exactly as they are in Eb major, so now III, IV and VII. Again, ANY of these chords can be III, IV or VI in some key.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/06/1212:58 PM

Greener, the problem is that at any given moment we have people trying to master the same fundamentals with VASTLY different learning styles as well as very different levels of mastery.

.

Ear players are spared all that nonsense, because it belongs to the world of NOTATION.

Agreed. In my simple little world though, notation is a huge missing link and a void I am slowly trying to eliminate. I'm beginning to understand now, the complexity of notating something that is otherwise no issue to play.

Originally Posted By: zrt90

We need a way to work while we're learning.

We have an F major triad. Looking at our circle of fifths we could be in F or any of the five adjacent keys, Bb or C major, G, D or A minor. We won't be in G maj or any further on the sharp side and we won't be Eb or any further on the flat side. We see from the grid (looking at it as notes now rather than chords) that if we're in Bb the E will be flattened. So we look at the E's to see if we're in Bb or F and the B's to see if we're in F or C. If we're in a minor key look for sharped sevenths, F#, C# or G# to suggest G, D or A minor.

I like this. Another perspective and weapon for arsenal.

Originally Posted By: zrt90

You see things with a wealth of knowledge and experience, keystring is able to explain it to someone who may not yet have sufficient knowledge and PianoStudent88 is able to explain it to someone doesn't "hear" the concept.

... and Greener: a) keeps us functioning as a cohesive and cooperative unitb) asks only meaningful insightful questions at the most appropriate times with utmost of professionalism c) ensures the unit functions strategically by achieving synergy from individual participants expertise d) all of the above

Originally Posted By: zrt90

I think we have a good formula here.

Agree, and I for one, am very appreciative of the freely shared knowledge and expert insight these analysis threads are providing. And, quite certain that the many viewers are likewise equally appreciative.

I've finished my Cheerios now. Group hug everybody ...

Are we ready to move along with further analysis? Not sure if you saw my post from a couple of days back re: content ID for this movement, before we move along to the 'Air Suisse'. Here it is again.

Originally Posted By: Greener

The Recapitulation M51-M84 very closely matches Exposition M1-M34, so no question of where coming from and ALL is accounted for.

Development starts out very similar to M1-M4, the next three measures are a melodic variation of M5-M7, then I think new material up to M48. M49 could be coming from M16.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/06/1201:29 PM

PianoStudent88 is able to explain it to someone doesn't "hear" the concept.

That makes me very happy, to hear it described that way. I sometimes feel incredibly stupid for not being able to hear most of this very clearly.

Today I was listening to a Baroque concerto on the radio and they came to the chords at the end of a phrase, and I thought "clearly minor." But if you play me chords in isolation, I have to think very hard to tell if they're major or minor, and I don't feel secure in my answer. If you play me a major scale first though, then the tonic minor chord played after that sounds clearly minor (and the tonic major chord sounds clearly major). However, a few months ago the Mozart Prague Symphony was on the radio, and I listened to the entire symphony thinking "clearly minor." I looked it up... and it's in D major.

There is an important principle here. Some lucky people just hear stuff. I don’t know how. It’s as if they start off at a place where most of us have to work to get to. To a large extent that is my story. But it is NOT the way the average person begins hearing things, and it’s not about where you start but where you GET to.

Most of my students can’t tell major from minor when chords are played in isolation. I can play random major and minor triads, and they simply guess. It’s about like flipping a coin and guessing heads or tails.

But if I play major and minor back and forth, toggling, starting with EITHER one, they will usually get it. It is the DIRECT comparison that starts a feeling of success: “Hey, I can DO this!”

The same thing will happen for any two “qualities”. If I toggle between minor and diminished triads, but keeping the same root, I will usually get the right answers. Each student has a different experience, but typical would be that minor sounds dark or heavy or serious, but it could be a final chord. A diminished chord is heard as something different, perhaps as something that is creepier or more “up in the air”.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/06/1201:59 PM

Originally Posted By: Greener

In my simple little world though, notation is a huge missing link and a void I am slowly trying to eliminate. I'm beginning to understand now, the complexity of notating something that is otherwise no issue to play.

But this is EXACTLY the point I was trying to make. There are two extremes:

1) People who play by ear, and very well, who have little or no knowledge of notation.2) People who can read just about anything in the universe but who have rarely if ever tried to play anything strictly by ear.

Obviously complete musicians are comfortable doing BOTH, but that can easily never happen if said musicians are not taught to read fluenty AND are not encouraged to experiment with pure sound away from notation.

Do you see the problem for teachers in this environment? We have people who have problems hearing the difference between two chords but who will never miss them when reading, then we have others who will instantly hear just about any chord as what it is but who will not be able to read the same chord.

Teaching these two very opposite kinds of students implies a totally DIFFERENT approach, and essentially it is an attempt at balance. When I am teaching I stress reading hugely, from day one, but I also stress chords from day one, and playing with them. I teach scales entirely by rote then ask students to experiment. Then we talk about each scale and each chord that we have learned when it appears in music we are learning.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/06/1202:38 PM

We have an F major triad. Looking at our circle of fifths we could be in F or any of the five adjacent keys, Bb or C major, G, D or A minor.

First of all, why FIVE adjacent keys? Let’s think this through:

F belongs in Bb, C and of course to F itself. That’s three places it is very comfortable.

As I explained it belongs to A minor, D minor and G minor but it also belongs to C minor, since in minor a IV chord can also be major.

Richard, I am not debating or correcting. I’m not sure my way of thinking is better. It may be worse.

But I am merely considering where major chord are most likely to appear in an any major or minor key, using the degree (such as I IV and V), then considering that ANY of these chords can be I IV or V in any OTHER key. Then I do the same thing in minor. For instance, in C minor Eb F Ab and Bb can all be major.

Quote:

We won't be in G maj or any further on the sharp side.

I don’t know if you grew up watching TV shows, some of them really HORRIBLE, you had to absorb the sounds of the typical “cowboy” themes, and there is an idiom there that is very common. Think only of the “Marlboro Man” theme, which came from “The Magnificent Seven”. Are we going to throw out this kind of music and stick only to sonatinas?

That’s what I mean when I talk about the “Baroque/Classical Musical Ghetto”. We start out with the assumption that anything outside of what Clementi or Mozart is not important, or too difficult. But this musical idiom, bVII to I, has been common for a very long time, and if we don’t consider it, we will also be lost when music goes Bb to G to C in the key of C major.

Or F to D to G in the key of G major

I may be mucking things up here. I may be jumping to hard things too soon, and I hope Greener and others will jump in and tell me if I am introducing confusing things!

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/06/1202:44 PM

Thinking more of major and minor and hearing: we're singing the Cantique de Jean Racine by Gabriel Fauré in chorus this fall. It's written in D major, or so it would appear (five flats, Db major chord at start and end). But it doesn't sound major at all to me. I'm trying to analyze it to try to understand how he achieves that effect.

Thinking about applying that to our sonatina analysis, it tells me that I need the paper analysis because I can't reliably hear if something is major or minor. On the other hand, it suggests that starting by listening might be exactly right, to collect up my aural impressions of a piece, and then using those to investigate the score. Then investigate the whole score. Then I'd end up with a set of categories, places where I hear interest or ordinariness, combined with places where the score suggests interest or ordinariness.

The most interesting of those categories for me, I think, is places where I hear something interesting and then I can find out from the score how the composer achieved it. This is rather a switch for me, because I used to not much care about the sound and only care about the patterns I could find on paper. In my music theory course I always felt incompetent at the sound part. We would be told what to listen for -- for example, the second part is in the relative minor, or the chords are alternating V7 I over and over -- and I could never understand what those kinds of things sounded like. But starting from a learner-centered approach, where I start with what I can hear and then investigate it, makes me feel much more successful: it allows me to come to terms with listening at my own pace and in my own terms.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/06/1203:02 PM

I don't usually identify a key (or local tonality) from a single chord in isolation. Sure, I can play the game of "in how many scales does the F major chord appear naturally?" (looking among the major and three constructed minor scales). But in practice, I'm using other chords, contextual clues, or the set if sharps and flats.

Other chords, usually V I or VIIdim I relations tip me off:

If I find lots of C7 and F, I expect I'm in F major. V7 I.

If I find lots of F and Bb, I expect Bb major. V I

F and Bbm, I expect Bb minor. V Im.

F and Dm, although I know "bIII, major", in theory, I don't usually recognize the key of D minor from this pair of chords. It takes either A or C#dim for me to quickly arrive at Dm.

Context:

If the piece ends on F, then I expect it's in F major.

If a passage has a lot of F Dm F Dm F Dm I may eventually start to wonder if it's in D minor (or F major), and start looking for other clues to confirm that.

Pattern of sharps and flats:

If I find both sharps and flats mixed up, I suspect a minor key, and use what I know about minor key signatures and leading tones to figure it out. I'm thinking some of what Gary has written about key may help me to figure this out more easily. For example, I always find it very difficult to figure out that the development of Clementi Sonatina #1, 1st movement, starts in C minor (and I can't remember if it stays in C minor). Gary's method, which I think involves zeroing in on the Eb and considering that it may be the flat third degree, may help me.

When I ever manage to get back to the Clementi scores, I'll look through them to give some examples of these ideas in action.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/06/1203:11 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

I know and appreciate what you're saying, Gary, but our prime objective here is not to analyse music - it was when we started on the Moonlight but it's not now - it is to look and see what weapons we're lacking in our analysing arsenal before we go back to such pieces as the Moonlight. The whole purpose of this thread, as far as I'm concerned, is to draw out these weaknesses and shore them up.

Major miscommunication!

I never use “analyze” in a narrow way, so it’s probably the wrong word. I simply meant that we are covering many different concepts, and it might be good to open additional threads in the future as a place to cover certain things in more depth. But if this is working as it, then I agree that we should continue: “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!”

Quote:

I wish I had the experience to do this more simply and the foresight to do this another way. Alas, I am not so gifted. I don't know where the next hole is going to be in the knowledge bucket.

I could not do a better job. If I make suggestions, or find possible holes, that’s because I am a bit on the outside, looking in. There are several factors that make me feel very unsure here:

1) We are dealing with people with SO many different backgrounds that it is a bit like teaching a large class where anyone can sign up, regardless of what they do or do not know.

2) We have only words. That is infinitely more difficult than teaching people we can see and interact with in other ways.

3) Some of the subjects we are covering here I do not normally cover very often with students, primarily because of lack of time. So trying to explain things here should help me teach better in “real life”.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/06/1203:36 PM

F belongs in Bb, C and of course to F itself. That’s three places it is very comfortable.

This is why we want you here, Gary!

Yes, let's think things through, indeed!

F major by itself implies that we could be in any number of different keys. Any number of keys could have an F, A or C in it. Clearly we need to investigate further. And I simply overlooked that. If it were F major in Bb or C minor there will be other clues such as Db, Eb, or a temporarily sharpened Ab (= A natural).

It could also be the flattened supertonic in E major. Or a temporary chromaticism in Gb major/Eb minor.

We will not come across an F major chord without it's occuring in context. So as well as the chord itself we must look at its context. After the chord itself look at the key signature and consider how it might be affected by extant accidentals. Look at the bass, the foundation of music.

We can't determine key from one thing alone. We need to keep adding clues until we can isolate one area or settle for ambiguity. We can expect that in the exposition of a sonatina it will be an easy matter. In the middle of a Wagnerian opera or a jazz improv, it may not be so straightforward.

So, returning to the original question of how much information is required to determine key, we conclude that there must be enough information from the chord and it's context to either establish the key or accept tonic ambiguity.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/06/1203:52 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/06/1203:55 PM

Gary, thinking of the Classical/Baroque music ghetto, what works for me is learning simpler patterns in restricted settings first, and then learning more complicated things. It may be that what I think of as "simpler" and "more complicated" is conditioned by the order in which I learned things. And it's surely true that the way my mind works, and the order in which things make sense to me, can be quirky.

I really like that I learned to analyze carefully chosen Classical and Baroque pieces first. (Actually, what I learned first was how to name the chords in major and minor keys, how to label them with roman numerals, how to make sense of accidentals as indicating secondary dominance (or a nearby key), and doing a lot of practice with four-part harmony hymns labelling every chord. And I'm glad of that foundation, too. But you know me, so you can probably see how that's exactly the kind of activity I would like, and since you have experience teaching, you can probably do what never occurred to me at the time, which is to understand how that may have been a difficult approach for at least some students in the class.)

Anyway, back to saying I liked starting with simple and restricted, in the Classical/Baroque ghetto. I feel like that gave me a good grounding in fundamental harmonic language. (At least on paper; but I won't blame the course for my lack of aural skills; it did have an aural component, but I think I would have needed a massively remedial, slow, and one-on-one approach to start to understand what I should be listening for, and how to recognize it in new pieces even after learning how to recognize it in the initial pieces.)

The fundamental language gives me ways to understand more complex pieces. For example, in the Chopin E minor Prelude Op. 28 No. 4. You pointed out how Chopin is slithering through complicated chords, but fundamentally he has waypoints where we see a simpler traditional harmonic structure. For example, B7 to Em (not sure if that's precisely one of the waypoints, but it seems like a likely waypoint in an E minor piece). If I didn't have the previous experience in the simpler, more restricted world, the waypoints would not have helped make sense of the Prelude at all for me. I would have just thought "so what, why is B7 and Em of any interest?". Or, with another chord, "In this sea of accidentals, why should D#dim7 be of any more interest than any of these other strange chords?"

What was disorienting to me for a while, after my course, was when I first started meeting chords that didn't fit into the neat sets of "triads and types of sevenths formed from scales," and chromaticism that wasn't drawn from proceeding neatly around the circle of fifths. I didn't have a language for them. Eventually I was fortunate enough to meet you here on Piano World, and I am learning to have a broader language, and broader ways to look for patterns. But I don't fault my initial course for that, because a course that had started out trying to show the whole broader world at once, I think that course would have left me feeling like there was no order to anything. It would have left me feeling like V7-I was as arbitrary a principle as the "flat 3, 5, and 7" in the descriptions of minor keys in my flute book when I was 11.

And I should add, it was a *very* long time after my course before I started to meet music that it couldn't explain. Mendelsohn's Elijah was one example, but that was the only example for a very long time, and everything else I met fell largely or entirely within the fundamental vocabulary that I had learned.

In the traditional way of teaching, what I regret not being able to take is a course that continued past Baroque and Classical, and taught us about Romantic and Modern music. That would have given me the language and the practice in more complicated music, and hopefully would have also introduced me to the general idea of how to think more broadly and find ways to describe things that go even beyond whatever I would have learned in that second class.

Even that second course might leave me not knowing all sorts of things, like jazz, or the cowboy chord, or what are some of the inventive harmonies used by the Beatles, or how to achieve certain moods and effects in movie music, etc. The list could go on. I don't think any one course or introduction can teach everything. So each person has to find a place to start, and be open to the idea that principles that work in one context may not be the whole story for another context.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/06/1204:54 PM

I mentioned the Cantique de Jean Racine. Here it is on Youtube, with one of those useful videos that shows the score.

I don't mean to discuss it here, since ostensibly we're discussing Clementi, and while I like the broad amount of ground we're covering on our scenic route, introducting a whole nother piece, in a different style and period, seems like not just taking the scenic route but actually rocketing to the Moon. I did want to provide the aural connection though, in case you're wondering what it sounds like. If I get more time, I might start a separate analysis thread about it.

(That recording doesn't seem to do it justice, but I can't tell if it's the recording, or (very likely) my crappy speakers, or that it's more fun to sing it and hear it from the inside, than it is to listen to the polished work from the outside, or what. Anyway, there are lots of other recordings on youtube, if you get the Fauré bug and want to find out how it sounds with different choirs.)

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/06/1205:33 PM

Oh, now that I'm listening to the Cantique de Jean Racine again, more carefully, I'm liking this recording better. It's curious, that it takes (for me) careful listening from the outside to hear the things that I hear easily when singing it from the inside.

OK, I'll try really hard to keep from rabbiting on about this piece, after saying I didn't mean to discuss it here.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/06/1210:59 PM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Oh, now that I'm listening to the Cantique de Jean Racine again, more carefully, I'm liking this recording better. It's curious, that it takes (for me) careful listening from the outside to hear the things that I hear easily when singing it from the inside.

OK, I'll try really hard to keep from rabbiting on about this piece, after saying I didn't mean to discuss it here.

Start a thread. I think in the end you will find out that it is quite basic, just in a hard key, and it has a lot of moving things in the piano that could obscure the rather simple chords.

By the way, I don't know it, and I could not listen. I just played the video and audiated the score. My grandson was playing a video game!

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/07/1211:11 AM

I'm slowly getting caught up, and I want to pick up on something Richard said way back during #4 mvmt 1.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Originally Posted By: Greener

Should have listened to this more, instead of relying on the score.

The better you get at reading the less you feel inclined to actually go to the piano but when the accidentals start getting into the mix it really is worth sitting down at the keyboard and playing through, not just the printed score, but put the bass in root intervals and simple triads to really get a feel for what the composer is doing!

I'm not sure what you mean by reading. Do you mean audiating: knowing what it will sound like just from reading the score, without playing it? I'm good at reading, meaning playing while reading the music, but less good at audiating, and while I can audiate a general sense of how the melody goes, I need to be at the keyboard (or listening to a recording) to start to hear the harmonic colour.

Not sure what this means. In exposition we were in C Major and in recap'n, at these measures in G minor, I thought. So, where is Bb coming from.

Yes, you did say G minor and I looked briefly at the score and saw Eb and F# but in M52 the bass is F and A so it's not minor at this point, it's only M55 that touches on G minor. It's only transitional anyway. The important thing is that in the exposition it was in F and now it's not so an extra measure, M55, is thrown in to take us back to F - that's the point, and then a repeat of M56 to balance the measures.

In mm.52-55, I find the key by looking at the chords.

True, just looking at the accidentals and the final chord will suggest G minor. The final chord on the last beat of m.55 is Gm, preceded by a standard D7/F#. Looking at accidentals, we see both sharps and flats in m.55 -- Bb, Eb, F# -- and that suggests a minor key with leading tone F# i.e. G minor (and the Bb and Eb are right for G minor).

And we see Eb all the way back in m.52, so we might think G minor starts there.

But looking at the chords tells a different story.

m.52 F7 Bb/Fm.53 F7 Bb/Fm.54 F7 Bb/Fm.55 D7/F# Gmm.56 C/E F

Whenever I see a (dominant) seventh chord, I expect some tonicization of the note a fifth lower. See F7, expect to find Bb or maybe Bbm. Sure enough, there is Bb, three times over.

This tells me we are in the key of Bb major, which is not unexpected. The IV chord of F major gives me the nearby key of the subdominant: Bb major.

In m.55, I look ahead to m.56 and decide that we're not really in G minor at all. The D Gm C F progression is basically a 6-2-5-1 progression, with the Dm7 that would appear in F major jazzed up into D7 to make the Gm more inevitable. But one could think of this as a temporary fleeting visit to Gm, reminiscent of the more definitive visit in mm.38-39, especially since it happens at a four-measure boundary where I often expect phrases or subphrases to end, and m. 56 begins a different melodic tweedly-deedly idea.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/07/1212:17 PM

Last of my posts catching up on Sonatina #4 movement 1, continuing talking about mm.52-54 and then expanding a bit.

I throw in Yet Another Roman Numeral System (YARNS). Ask if you want me to explain it. I won't normally use this system on this thread, but I'm showing it here because part of my idea for this post came from the emotional relief it was for me to resume doing my personal score-labeling in this system which is the most familiar one to me. I'll just say, to avoid the most obvious points of confusion with the system we normally use on this thread, that in the system shown here the numbers refer to inversions rather than added notes in a chord, and the slashes refer to key rather than inversion.

In mm.52-54 we don't fully cadence in Bb, so maybe we're just passing through Bb major rather than *in* Bb major, but I tend to really like to know what keys we're passing through. Maybe this is because my fundamental basics are a traditional roman numeral notation which requires knowing what key a chord is in. I've been re-working through the sonatinas labeling them in the original style that I learned, and it is actually a huge relief to me to label the pieces this way. So for me these measures are:

The middle measure, m.16, has been replaced by three measures, mm.55-57. Examining further, this is because mm.13-18 stay in one key, the key of V, C major, whereas mm.52-59 transition from the key of IV, Bb major, back to the original tonic key I, F major. Mm.55-57 create and underline that transition.

I could find a lot of that correspondence by comparing note-by-note (or, more quickly, melodic and accompaniment contours). But that can be tedious for me. Plus it's harder when variations get thrown in: is that an essential variation, meaning something different is happening (as in mm.55-57), or a decorative variation, thrown in for creativity but in essence the same as before (as in mm.61-71)? Plus I like seeing confirmation in two ways: both by contours and by harmonic structure/labelling.

I didn't understand the difference between m.16 and mm.55-57, and the reason for that difference, until doing this full chord analysis.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/07/1212:28 PM

I know I said that was my last post on that movement, but I had another idea. This idea was suggested precisely by doing the specific chord analysis which suggested very precise statements of key in mm.52-59, whether established (F major), temporary (Bb major), or fleeting (G minor).

It's this: it seems very clever to me for Clementi to transition from the subdominant ("I'm a Classical composer, I Must Visit The Subdominant" ), into its relative minor (G minor), and then turn that relative minor into part of what is essentially a 6-2-5-1 progression in the original tonic (F major).

That gives me something to be on the lookout for: how composers transition from the subdominant back to the tonic. Is this a standard method? Are there other typical methods?

Curiously, while one could see this as a general strategy for changing key up a fifth, I don't recall seeing this type of transition being used to transition from the tonic to the dominant in an exposition. Maybe I just haven't noticed.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/07/1212:37 PM

Sorry to have jumped ahead PS88, I was listening, referencing stuff in a different session, then posting, and see you already have two expansive posts during this time re: No. 4 Sonatina.

I will look over your posts now and report my confusion forthcoming ...

I don't think you're jumping ahead. I'm the one who's jumping way back. I have some thoughts on the Sonatina #5 Air Suisse, but let me know if you want me to hold them until after you work through my new Sonatina #4 material.

I'm catching up on the thread today, so may have comments on the rest of #4 and the first movement of #5. Do you want those all at once, or would you like me to pace them out over a few days, interspersed with the material as we move forwards in #5?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/07/1212:50 PM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

I'm catching up on the thread today, so may have comments on the rest of #4 and the first movement of #5. Do you want those all at once, or would you like me to pace them out over a few days, interspersed with the material as we move forwards in #5?

You are miles ahead of me with this stuff PS88. To be honest, I am having big enough challenge digesting information as it is presented and thinking through current sonatina analysis.

Fire away with your queries for confirmation -- on any Sonatina and at any time, -- but, not sure if I can offer much help. Will try if I can, but otherwise, I am more likely to continue just learning more by your questions/challenges/observations. You will most likely need to await the experts for the answers and confirmation you are seeking.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/07/1212:54 PM

Thanks, Greener, that makes sense. I'm going to try to stay caught up with the thread as we move forward, precisely because it makes my comments more useful if they come in the context at the same time everyone else is considering those movements.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/07/1201:38 PM

I'm not sure what you mean by reading. Do you mean audiating: knowing what it will sound like just from reading the score, without playing it?

Yes, in this instance I'm referring to audiation. When you can audiate well there's not much need to go to the piano until it starts getting chromatic or modulating freely.

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

In mm.52-55, I find the key by looking at the chords.

Yes, we've just covered the aspect of context when establishing key so we should expect more precision from our viridescent pioneer from now on!

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

In m.55, I look ahead to m.56 and decide that we're not really in G minor at all. The D Gm C F progression is basically a 6-2-5-1 progression, with the Dm7 that would appear in F major jazzed up into D7 to make the Gm more inevitable.

The D7 does suggest we've left Bb and the G minor is very fleeting so it could be read as a broader ii-V-I. Until we have a final cadence or deliver a phrase in a key we can't really say for sure where we are.

M56-57 are, for me, a variant of M15-16 rather than new material. Heigh-ho!

_________________________________

The Andante con espressione sounds sad and plaintive. Try flattening the D and A and see the difference a minor tonality makes.

The upper melody finishes on F rather than Bb and that helps to give it an unfinished feel.

________________________________

I've seen your analysis, Jeff, but it's on hold at the moment! I'm waiting to see where our Student is going with number 4!

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/07/1201:59 PM

M56-57 are, for me, a variant of M15-16 rather than new material. Heigh-ho!

(Why does my spellchecker always want to change zrtf into Zerg? With a capital letter no less. Who or what is a Zerg?)

Well, sure, all the deedly bits going up and down are related to each other. But the rest of mm.52-59 pretty replicates mm.13-18 pretty exactly (allowing for the different keys) except for mm.54-57 which depart from m.16 much more dramatically. In particular, the precise melodic contour of mm.56-57, with the jump up to G and back down, and the two sixteenth rests, isn't met anywhere else. Nor is the half note/quarter note combination met anywhere else in the accompaniment. Also the inversions of the chords are changed from the model. This all seems like purposeful and significant variation from m.16.

Compare the variation in mm.28-30 to mm.69-70, which is much more straightforward (basically an inversion) and keeps the same chords and inversions (relative to the current key). (I would put all of mm.58-71 in the category of creative but nonessential variation, but the last three measures are most convenient to pull out for a quick comparison.)

By contrast, something essentially different is happening harmonically in mm.55-56 than in m.16.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/07/1202:13 PM

That was cross-posted.

I see your point about melodic spread. Maybe the synthesis of both of our points is that Clementi has to do something different harmonically -- transition back to the tonic -- and he does that in a way that shows unity with the model by doubling m.15 into mm.55-55, and doubling m.16 into mm.56-57.

I see mm.56-57 as being a LOT more different from their model, than mm.54-55 are from their model, melodically. In fact you could argue (or maybe not *you*, but *I* could argue ) that mm.56-57 are essentially more like m.15 than m.16, or at least share features with both m.16 and m.17. The essential notes of m.15 are same-same-down (F F Eb). This same pattern is found in all four of mm.54-57: Eb Eb D, C C Bb, Bb Bb A, Bb Bb A. Mm.56-57 then each add on the upward arpeggio from the end of m.16, but abbreviated by dropping a note and starting from a lower point, with the result that the arpeggio no longer reaches the highest note in the measure, and certainly not an octave up as in m.16.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/07/1203:14 PM

Sonatina #4, movement 2, andante con expressione.

There was some question about m.22 in the B part, with C#dim7 Dm, and a question about what the C# was doing in the middle of a passage predominantly in F major (mm.21-26). I said something about it at the time, but wasn't looking at the score or the context.

Now that I'm looking and listening, I would say that mm. 21-22 are doing exactly the same thing in F major, with a one measure feint to the sixth Dm, as mm.13-14 were doing in Bb major, with a one measure feint to the sixth Gm.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/07/1203:27 PM

From the Sonatina #4 movement 3 "Rondo" discussion:

Originally Posted By: Greener

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

I don't foresee a struggle finding out where the material comes from for the development section. Tying the piece up to the other two movements is a bit more of a challenge but needn't detain us if it's not obvious.

I'm good with the needn't detain us part. Turns out this is my least favorite aspect -- likely an indication of needing more attention -- of these analysis.

Tying the movements together is also the most challenging part for me. I don't think I have ever been able to see the connections that Richard makes.

Maybe I will come to Sonatina 6 in an appropriate spiritual state achieved by prayer and fasting, and will be granted a vision of thematic material across movements.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/07/1205:52 PM

I wouldn't even think of it as four against three. I got used to that stuff playing Haydn. The turns are just a quickly played figure.

Four against three, played slowly enough to need the right rhythm, I play against the phrase 'pass the golden butter'. For Chopin's Fantasie Impromptu it just comes. It's too fast to think about a phrase - you just feel it.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/07/1206:40 PM

Yes, I like the parallels with the first movement. Do you see M26-30 echoing M4 and M6? How do you feel about M41-48 being influenced by the left hand in M24-32 in the first movement?

I don't see those parallels at all. Can you give some more details?

Separate from that, here is what I wanted to say about the Air Suisse:

The beginning, mm.1-24, is not four identical 6-bar phrases. It's a six bar phrase with simple harmony ending open on G, followed by a very similar, but slightly different, phrase, with slightly more complex harmony, ending closed on C. Those 12 measures are then repeated.

In roman numerals,First six bars: I I I I I VSecond six bars: I I I, IIm7/7 VIIdim, IIm7/7 VIIdim, I

OK, the second six bars is not terribly complex -- it's just a variation on ii-V-I -- but honestly, almost anything will be more complex than I (a long time passes) V.

When this material returns at m.49, the first 12 measures return exactly as before. The second 12 measures changes though. Yes, it's jazzed up with grace notes and put up an octave and tricked out with a fancy sixteenth note accompaniment. But along with all those creative cosmetic variations, there's a real difference: the harmony changes. Now we get I V7 in almost every measure. The IIm is abandoned. This all leads up to the coda from mm.72-82 which is just I over and over.

I've started to detect that pretty much everything is V and I over and over, with occasional IIm and VIIdim. Anything else is a rare event. Not just here, but in all the sonatinas. I'm planning to tabulate the chords and the key changes to quantify this. (Just in case you didn't think I was enough of a lunatic .)

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/07/1206:40 PM

Your spot of the F# in M47 left me speechless. So much so that I said nothing!

Thought it may have been something like that. From now on I will assume your silence means, I'm golden.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Do you see M26-30 echoing M4 and M6?

Yes, I do now.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

How do you feel about M41-48 being influenced by the left hand in M24-32 in the first movement?

I would say it is a safe bet. Yes, striking resemblance.

Thanks for pointing out though. I never would have seen these, by looking at the score and would have needed to go over many times before they came by listening as well. Only when comparing these specific sections to each other does it become evident.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/07/1207:49 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

I wouldn't even think of it as four against three. I got used to that stuff playing Haydn. The turns are just a quickly played figure.

Except I can't seem to reel the turn off properly and evenly in the same amount of time as the triplets. A trill or an appogiatura or a mordent would not be a problem (I don't think), but the turn just defeats me.

Quote:

Four against three, played slowly enough to need the right rhythm, I play against the phrase 'pass the golden butter'. For Chopin's Fantasie Impromptu it just comes. It's too fast to think about a phrase - you just feel it.

The problem with that, for me, is that I would need someone to recite the phrase for me with the correct rhythm. Now that I've worked out the rhythm, I know the precise rhythm for "pass the golden butter", but without knowing the rhythm, I might have said "golden" in the wrong rhythm. OK, for something as fast as the turn it may not be audible, but in slower examples I want to be sure I have a precise idea in mind.

Maybe it's just me that finds it quite satisfying to have the precise numbers worked out. Actually, I read about this in a book, so I know there's at least one other person who likes this method -- the book's author.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/07/1208:23 PM

Backtracking a wee bit from the Air Suisse, I'm going to post on Sonatina 5, first movement.

Originally Posted By: Greener

Op 36. No. 5

M1-M34 Exposition; M1-15 G Major; M16 - M34 D Major

I see D major beginning in m.13. The next phrase starts in m.16, but we are already in D major by then.

Comparing to the Recapitulation, I see mm.13-15 as a bridge, which is the term I'm using for the material that gets more changed in the recapitulation than the rest of the exposition. The material before it is in the tonic and the material after it is in the dominant (tonic, in the recapitulation). The bridge itself can have the switch from tonic to dominant any where in it.

It's not necessarily a transition: for example here, BANG, at m.13 you're in D major, no real transition or feeling of extended modulation. But it's identifiable to me, once I get to the recapitulation and can compare back to the exposition.

I call it the bridge in both the exposition and the recapitulation. Does this have an official name?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/08/1206:37 AM

Sonatina #4 movement 3, RondoWhenever there is a difficulty with an ornament it is always a good idea to practise first without the ornament. This will give the intrinsic rhythm of the section.

In this instance you might try adding an upper mordent on the C, giving cdE - cdC just in RH. When you're happy with that, very slowly lift your hand letting the fourth finger linger on the E but finish a couple of inches above the keyboard. As your hand comes back down to play the cdC allow your third and fourth fingers to strike the D and E in passing, by dint of being closer to the keys than your index finger as you lower your hand rather than by a deliberate finger action.

When you're comfortable with the sound of the five notes play them deliberately rolling the fingers as you would by drumming them on the desk. When you can play the RH well enough add the left hand back.

GracesWhen there's a single grace note with the tail crossed through it's an acciacatura and is played (on the beat) with (theoretically) no time. When there's no line through the tail, as in the Haydn sonata we looked at earlier, it's an appogiatura and shares the time with the following note, a grace and a crotchet being played as two quavers.

When there's more than one note as at the start of the Air Suisse, these are acciacature and their tails are not struck through. They're played on the beat but the principal note retains the accent.

Parallels in Movements 1 and 2The A section of the Air Suisse making use of the figure MM3, 4 and 5 is reminiscent of the figure that begins each phrase in the first subject of the Presto.

The three note figure used in MM26-30 in the B section of the Air Suisse is reminiscent of the three note figure in MM5 and 7 of the Presto.

Measures 41-48 of the A.S. emphasising the double strike (especially if the LH rests and RH semis are ignored) recalls the double strike pattern used in LH in MM21-22 and similar through the second subject in the Presto.

The Air SuisseMM3-5 & 9 are C but M10-11 are Dm7? The harmony in the first and third lines is simply tonic leading to an imperfect cadence on V. Lines two and four subtly introduce a rootless G7 to close the phrase with a final cadence on tonic. In the final iteration the closure is announced more definitively and a coda appended.

This is supposed to be simple; it's a ranz des vaches, a simple Alpine horn melody.

Listen to this one, the first four lines begin at 6:10, 6:24, 6:37 and 6:50. The second two at 7:05 and 7:25. Note the similarity (coincidental) of the three note figure here. Note also the changed harmony in the return of A and the impending finality of the tonic dominant alteration. (The music's quite boring after 8:45, you can stop the video there.)

The PrestoYes, the first subject closes on the first beat of M16 and the second subject begins there. D major was heralded with the introduction of C# in M12 but it isn't established until the first beat of M16.

For a bridge passage I expect new material, a new phrase. When the final phrase of the first subject changes to the dominant, as here, there's no need for a bridge passage but the end of the phrase will be different in the recap. The end of the phrase may well be called a bridge passage but I have never understood that to be the case. Bridge or bridge passage is the technical term though I reserve bridge for the AABA song structure.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/08/1209:02 AM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

For a bridge passage I expect new material, a new phrase.

OK, I'll think of a new name. Maybe I'll just call it "Altered" in my personal notes.

Thanks for the notes about the turn, and grace notes. Acciaccatura. Appoggiatura. Acciaccatura. Appoggiatura. (Trying to drill it into my brain.) Both of these have more consonants than I would expect (trying to learn to spell them as well as play them). I think I may finally have a chance of remembering these, because recently I've been doing a lot of labelling of non-chord tones as appoggiaturas, so that gives me a hook to remember that that's the long grace note. If I knew more Italian, I would remember that (I think) acciaccatura means "crushed", and appoggiatura means (I think) "leaning", but apart from tempo markings mostly the only Italian I know is "la chiave, prego" ("The key, please" when asking for the key to the bathroom when in a bar).

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/08/1209:04 AM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

The PrestoYes, the first subject closes on the first beat of M16 and the second subject begins there. D major was heralded with the introduction of C# in M12 but it isn't established until the first beat of M16.

Are you saying I shouldn't say it's in D major until m.16?

Thinking about key... can't you be in a new key before it gets established with a cadence? Was it Beethoven's Symphony #3 (or was it #7) which starts with 4 minutes of No Tonic Chord that you told me about, and finally there's a resolution? Surely during those 4 minutes the listener (at least the listener more astute than me) has a sense of the tonic that they're yearning for and keep getting denied? I know that's an example of starting out in a key, rather than a new key, but I would think the same principle applies.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/08/1210:18 AM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Whenever there is a difficulty with an ornament it is always a good idea to practise first without the ornament. This will give the intrinsic rhythm of the section.

In this instance you might try adding an upper mordent on the C, giving cdE - cdC just in RH. When you're happy with that, very slowly lift your hand letting the fourth finger linger on the E but finish a couple of inches above the keyboard. As your hand comes back down to play the cdC allow your third and fourth fingers to strike the D and E in passing, by dint of being closer to the keys than your index finger as you lower your hand rather than by a deliberate finger action.

When you're comfortable with the sound of the five notes play them deliberately rolling the fingers as you would by drumming them on the desk. When you can play the RH well enough add the left hand back.

I'm confused by the notes you name: "cdE - cdC" what is that? Also if I'm playing an upper mordent on a C, wouldn't that be C D C? so my fourth finger is lingering on D, not E? (I'm assuming that you mean also that my third -- middle -- finger is playing the center note of the turn, C.) A turn on C I would play as D C B C (barring any accidentals). So actually now I'm not even sure of the applicability of the upper mordent C D C.

I feel like I've somehow totally missed the exact steps of what you're trying to say, even as the general idea -- start simpler, then work up complexity in steps -- is clear.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/08/1211:47 AM

I'm saying that it's heralded from M12 and it's established in M16. Whether we're in it between those two points is a matter of interpretation.

In M12 the C# is just an appogiatura, (the other kind, not the grace note). M13 is a very disguised A7 so the D major in M14 doesn't have a tonic ring to it. In M15 the Em begins the ii-V-I but can also be ambiguous as the relative minor in G. It's only when the A7 is heard at the end of M15 that we really expect D major.

Symphony #7 begins with 4 minutes of dominant seventh. There is a sense of impending tonic but V7 is not tonic. It belongs to a key but until we get the tonic are we really in it? I know I'm 'in it' when my wife gives me THAT look but that's another matter!

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

I'm confused by the notes you name: --start simpler, then work up complexity in steps -- is clear.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/08/1202:35 PM

The turn in the sonatina no 4.I've been back to the original post now. Those turns are done on fingers 3,2,1 as opposed to 4,3,2 but the principle is the same. Lift the hand after the first F (M22) and position the fingers so that the third finger is lower than the index finger (not difficult) and drop the hand to strike the E with the thumb and the 3 and 2 fingers should have played the G and F on the way, then play the F again before the A.

Again play the measures without ornaments first, then get the ornaments right in RH alone.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/08/1202:41 PM

On Sonatina #4 movement 3, Rondo, I thought 4 against 3 was a looooong way in my future, but here it is in the form of a RH turn against LH triplets, five times in mm.21, 22, and 24.

I have them in M22, 23 and 25. Different measure numbers?

You have every right to feel frustrated because the skill demanded here, which is 4 against 3 as you have mentioned, is simply several levels of difficulty beyond the rest of the piece.

I think Richard meantioned Chopin's Fantasy Impromptu, and when you play music like that, your hands asborb the skill of 4 against 3. Why did Clementi throw in that skill in music that was otherwise fairly simple?

My answer: composer stupidiy. If he had taught his own music, day in and day out, he would have eventually rewritten that passage, IMHO.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/08/1202:50 PM

Originally Posted By: Gary D.

I have them in M22, 23 and 25. Different measure numbers?

I number the first full measure as 1, and the pickup measure doesn't have a number. I think this is how I've normally seen people numbering on this thread. Should I be numbering from the pickup measure as 1? And should we agree how we'll do it on this thread (or maybe everyone else is doing it that way already and I haven't noticed)?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/08/1203:10 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/08/1204:59 PM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Originally Posted By: Gary D.

I have them in M22, 23 and 25. Different measure numbers?

I number the first full measure as 1, and the pickup measure doesn't have a number. I think this is how I've normally seen people numbering on this thread. Should I be numbering from the pickup measure as 1? And should we agree how we'll do it on this thread (or maybe everyone else is doing it that way already and I haven't noticed)?

You are right. I was going by the score, which measures the pickup as 1. I would never do that, but I just want to be sure we are all in the same place.

It is much more important to talk about how to play those dratted turns!!!

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/09/1201:46 PM

I sense some dissension from the troops in regards to my numbering methodology:

OK, I wasn't sure about this.

Are we good with everything that has been labeled thus far?

I will not number the leading phrases moving forward. Actually, thought I had done this correctly, at least in most cases. But in some instances I was not sure how to handle and suppose I chose the wrong guess. Sorry about this.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/09/1202:14 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/09/1205:26 PM

Originally Posted By: Greener

I sense some dissension from the troops in regards to my numbering methodology:

OK, I wasn't sure about this.

Are we good with everything that has been labeled thus far?

I will not number the leading phrases moving forward. Actually, thought I had done this correctly, at least in most cases. But in some instances I was not sure how to handle and suppose I chose the wrong guess. Sorry about this.

Greener, there is only a problem when two people have two different scores marked with different measure numbers.

You might think that any edition will number measures the same way, but that is simply not the case. Some editions will use the same measure numbers for the measures in 1st and 2nd endings, and there are other discrepancies. I was fine with you numbers, because at least there were NUMBERS!!!

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/10/1211:29 AM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/10/1211:54 AM

OK, thanks. I kind of skipped over the Rossini part (tied up with other non-musical matters the last few days,) but will go back and take a look at this. Then, will move along with the Rondo.

Richard, wanted to ask you something. Back to Bach for a moment. I am working on Little Prelude No. 2 now -- loving it by the way, this one is about my speed for actually reading and playing at the same time , albeit slowly -- of Bach's 6 little preludes.

Question is: What is the thingy on line 3 after the repeat. Is this a partial turn? When I hear Mr. Seeman play it, it does not sound like a full turn. Also on some of the other Preludes (No.1 for example,) he completely skips over some these squiggly things, and also what looks to be a full turn in measure 4 (of No. 1.)

Of course, I can make it sound like he is, but just trying to understand what these things in the score are trying to tell me.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/10/1212:19 PM

The squiggly thing is a short trill sign with a vertical line through it over the B in Measure 32, yes?

That's a mordent. Played BAB quickly. You might see a natural sign underneath it. A's are natural from M27 to 33.

He has a much more commodious tempo in the second one. I prefer Landowska's tempo for the first. Neither of them play the full turn in the first but Wanda adds a nice trill instead of the mordent in the second.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/10/1212:37 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/10/1212:49 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

The squiggly thing is a short trill sign with a vertical line through it over the B in Measure 32, yes?

That's the one.

Yes, I had not listened much to Wanda previously, as I preferred the Piano version. I agree with the tempo on the first. I would also much prefer to slow the tempo a bit on the second. There are lovely harmonies that are very effective in the flowing 3 beat time signature, which I think work nicer at a slower pace. But, who am I to argue with the Pro's. Anyway will see what I think of this when I learn the whole thing.

Yes, the trill (sounds like double mordent she is using here.) Plus, she is throwing in a few extra little mordents or trills (not sure which) that are not in the score. M4 - she is using more then just the accent note here, and 2nd measure after the repeat, sounds like a mordent.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/10/1202:10 PM

If you're going to invest time in it, you need to make it your own. You must play it like you mean it, with passion, as if you had composed it in response to your own soul.

If you speak the truth, people will overlook flaws in the delivery.

I like this answer. My thoughts exactly, but I like hearing it from you, better. And, I really like this prelude.

I shall speak the truth and there will be no flaws in delivery. With this No. 2, that is. No. 4, I'm not so sure about. Still struggling with some of the timing in the second half. More rehearsal needed.

Will get back to you on the keys. It looks like just D Major in the what I have identified as the B section, above. Need to look more at what I have called development section, as there could be a bit more at play here.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/11/1206:41 AM

The Rondo is ostensibly a (groovy kind of) Da Capo ternary form but a (Mindbending) Rondo structure.

We're presented with the main Rondo theme in M1-16/17. We then transition via A7 to D major before the Rondo theme returns in M28/29 where it's subjected to a little variation and a coda tacked on.

The double blows that have characterised the three movements here are never far away in this double page middle section. But the triads are sparse and the harmony ambiguous. There's a V-I cadence in A at M75/76 and then we're off again into tonal ambiguity until D major appears to establish itself more as a dominant than a tonic not landing on a root position D major until M 107 (and even that is not a triad).

I want to call this an ABA piece, B being M60-114. The title being Rondo I guess B would be the D major bit at M17 and C the coda.

M60-114 is unexpectedly long without a return of the rondo theme and it's certainly treated like a development section thematically.

Good work on naming the keys, Jeff, but what's the story with Prelude 4 specifically?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/11/1209:05 AM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

what's the story with Prelude 4 specifically?

Challenges are: In the A section, the descending runs -- M8-M9, and again at M10-M11 --; getting these to come even to tempo without rushing is a challenge. I'm doing a much better job with it now and not so worried about it. But, still having an issue with landing on the LH 3rd at the beginning of M10. Not sure why. When I try with all my might to play it softly, I don't hear both notes. Else, there is too much emphasis. I tend to think this is an acoustic adjustment issue, and I would not have this problem with a digital piano. Or, perhaps this is just my excuse. Again though, this is not that big of concern. Bigger concern ahead ...

In section B; I am playing the entire piece close to a presentation tempo that I am happy with now. But, M38 and M40 are throwing out the tempo every time, and the transition back to M41 is not so seamless. Not sure if I am hearing these measures right, and may need to go back to the recordings. Or, perhaps I should try a metronome? I have never used one, but could give it a go.

I think these pieces are excellent for where I'm at in my learning -- both for technical playing ability, and for strengthening my reading (more so No. 2 for the later,) plus I love the harmonies and Bach in general -- and, want to get them as good as I possibly can. These are the areas I am struggling with most at the moment.

Any suggestions appreciated.

Thanks, Richard.

I will prepare the numbering for Sonatine No. 6 now and will post a little later.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/11/1211:23 AM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/11/1212:33 PM

These areas all have one thing in common; controlling the fingers, particularly the weaker ones - it's not about strength, it's about control. You need to practise controlling them every day.

Hanon provides the sort of exercise they need but not the system. Do exercise 21 at a steady even tempo about the same speed as you intend to do this prelude. One octave up and down is sufficient. When you're comfortable with it do it in dotted rhythm. When you're comfortable with that you need a way to control the fingers without letting them fly. Do Ex. 21 in the RH and Ex. # 1 in LH (at half the speed). One octave up and down for 7 to 10 days then see if it's made a difference in the prelude.If you take to it easily use a different Ex. from Hanon Vol. 1. in LH. Keep the brain engaged and you won't find it boring.

Practise M8 - M11 separately from the rest and also 38-40. Do them half tempo until they're flawless, then up to tempo, then put the parts back together. Emphasise the accents.

If you don't have a metronome count out loud not mentally. It's easier to keep time with a physical action.

M10 - go slow enough that you can put your finger on the F# before you play it and try to use a stroking motion. There are two accents in each bar, point them.

M39 - squeeze the upper G, don't bang it. Play these upper notes like a violin or flute and the lower ones like a 'cello or clarinet.

Don't consider speed until the delivery is flawless. This isn't pizza. Quality is more important than delivery time.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/11/1212:39 PM

I'm getting lost. A few days ago PianoStudent88 said she was still working on Sonatina 4 and needed to backtrack to it before getting to Air Suisse. Then Richard wrote that "we" are finished with Air Suisse, and now we are on to number 6? I just looked back umpteen pages. I don't believe that the group has completed all of these sonatinas. In fact, the only people left are Greener, Richard, P88, Gary and myself. Unless P88 has caught up, then we are not finished previous pieces. I am still catching up to 3, 4, and Suisse.

I'm reading about a rondo (also apparently finished), and a prelude 4. Rondo of which sonatina? Does the rondo have a prelude, or is this prelude 4 of something else? We did a Chopin prelude 4 a while back - is that the one? I am lost and falling ever further behind. Is there a point in discussing any of the sonatinas that you guys have already finished? Am I the only one? Where is everybody else?

I was interested in the sonatinas I haven't done yet, but I don't know if there is a point if they are considered already done. Nobody will want to discuss what has been discussed and "done".

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/11/1212:59 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/11/1212:59 PM

Originally Posted By: keystring

I'm getting lost. A few days ago PianoStudent88 said she was still working on Sonatina 4 and needed to backtrack to it before getting to Air Suisse. Then Richard wrote that "we" are finished with Air Suisse, and now we are on to number 6? I just looked back umpteen pages. I don't believe that the group has completed all of these sonatinas. In fact, the only people left are Greener, Richard, P88, Gary and myself. Unless P88 has caught up, then we are not finished previous pieces. I am still catching up to 3, 4, and Suisse.

Sorry for the confusion KS. If you look back to October 1 at 10:23 AM EDT, this is where we started No. 5. We did all the movements, but intermixed with several other theory lessons and discussion. Yes, including PS88 wanted to go back to No. 4 and discussion continued there for a bit.

Meanwhile, I was chomping at the bit on No. 5 and when I got the green light, we progressed through Air Suisse (not a great deal of discussion on this one) and then Rondo, just yesterday. So, now I have posted No 6.

Will await your, or consensus approval to proceed. And, happy to further discuss, any up to No. 5 until everyone is comfortable with these analysis to date.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/11/1201:10 PM

Originally Posted By: keystring

I'm reading about a rondo (also apparently finished), and a prelude 4.

Prelude No. 4 was my little diversion to ask Richard for some help. So, sorry about this, it is not thread related, but I thought easier to ask here. But, will not continue here (that is, after this note .)

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Hanon provides the sort of exercise they need but not the system. Do exercise 21 at a steady even tempo about the same speed as you intend to do this prelude. One octave up and down is sufficient. When you're comfortable with it do it in dotted rhythm. When you're comfortable with that you need a way to control the fingers without letting them fly. Do Ex. 21 in the RH and Ex. # 1 in LH (at half the speed). One octave up and down for 7 to 10 days then see if it's made a difference in the prelude.If you take to it easily use a different Ex. from Hanon Vol. 1. in LH. Keep the brain engaged and you won't find it boring.

Thanks, Richard. Yes, keen to give this a try. Will I find this "Hanon exercises" online somewhere?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/11/1201:12 PM

We're always ready to discuss what's gone before but some of us may be able to discuss it with a greater familiarity.

The prelude was a backtrack to Bach.

Join in wherever you are, keystring. The pieces don't go out of date. If you're reading the whole thread post from wherever you are. If you're only reading from the current page post on where you're at in the sonatinas. There are aspects we can't have covered given the time we've spent (or not spent!) on each bit and it does no harm to say the same thing again though you're more likely to add a new slant.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/11/1201:45 PM

I am always happy to backtrack and talk about something that went earlier. To me "done" means "I've said/asked everything I can think of, but I'm always open to new insights, and even to re-covering the same material."

I've said everything I need to say/ask on Sonatina 4.

I'm not quite done with Sonatina 5. I dived into the Movement 2 Air Suisse and have said/asked everything I needed to say/ask with it, but I haven't actually done Movement 1 (or Movement 3), and I would like to.

Can we hold off on Sonatina 6 until I catch up on Sonatina 5?

I would like to be able to be fully engaged in Sonatina 6 at the same time as the main discussion is happening, but I'd really like another day to catch up on #5 before diving into #6.

keystring and Gary, would it be OK for you to just do a "reset" and join back in on Sonatina 6 when we get to it in a day or two (assuming that my request to wait till I'm done with #5 is accepted)? Not that there's any obligation of course for you to join in at any level, but I think you both add a lot to the thread.

keystring, the Preludes that Greener has brought up are from the Bach Six Little Preludes. Greener started working on them when we had the (now-abandoned) binary form thread. They're not connected to the subject of this thread, and I think just came up as a quick comment from Greener, and then that side topic unexpectedly grew into several posts.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/11/1201:46 PM

Is there some better way for us to regulate the pace of the thread, or to make clearer what we're talking about?

I don't want us to say "no we won't go back and discuss previous material." Unfortunately, revisiting previous material does bring the possibility of confusion when renewed conversations about previous material intermingle with current conversations about the latest material.

Is there some way we can reduce the confusion? Should we be doing more of a check-in before proceeding to a new movement, and waiting longer to hear from some larger core of people before proceeding? And who should be in that core?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/11/1202:17 PM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

I'm not quite done with Sonatina 5. I dived into the Movement 2 Air Suisse and have said/asked everything I needed to say/ask with it, but I haven't actually done Movement 1 (or Movement 3), and I would like to.

Can we hold off on Sonatina 6 until I catch up on Sonatina 5?

I would like to be able to be fully engaged in Sonatina 6 at the same time as the main discussion is happening, but I'd really like another day to catch up on #5 before diving into #6.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/11/1202:49 PM

Has anyone any experience of threads that rely on such participation and how they manage?

It would seem reasonable to allow a certain passage of time for each sonata/sontina, perhaps we could do one per week and those with more time can do all the movements and those with less can just do one movement.

Any other ideas (apart from getting Greener to do a large symphony between movements)?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/11/1203:02 PM

People are going to go at different speeds. What would be very helpful is to always name which sonata is being referred to. So not "the rondo" but "the rondo in S. 5". Not m. 23, but "m. 23, rondo (or movement x), S. 4". You are already open to the idea that some of us will be discussing sonatas that others have already finished. That is necessary and is already happening. I freelance with an uneven workload so I tend to do things in lurches.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/11/1205:28 PM

By this accounting, I still have the following measures unaccounted for from exposition:

M5-M12 (M9-M12=M1-4) so just leaves M5-M8M23-M24 (same as M20-M21)

I saw an explanation of all the parts of the movement, but I didn't catch the explanation of mm 5 - 8. I may have missed it.

Sonata 4, movement 2, andante con espressioneI'm interested in part of the B section. Richard says m. 21 is Em7b5. This is the same as E half diminished. If you stick a C underneath then you get C E G Bb D which is C9 which naturally goes to F - the next chord is F/A. The Em7b5 also goes to F/A with E climbing to F in the bass. I understand that the half dim. chord often has the feel of a 9 chord with the same kind of function.

I agree with what was written about it.

In regards to Richard's m. 26, with the E nat. indicating an F chord, I hear it too. In m. 25 we have C7-F, and with F in the bass in m. 26, followed by Bb and the recap. in m. 27, my ear wants to hear F for all those reasons. F is V. I hear E natural as a lower neighbour, and when playing it I might want to put more weight on the F.

Did the question about mm 21 - 24 ever get resolved, Greener?

Sonata 4, movement 3, Rondo

I didn't find anything to add or ask about.However, it's an interesting question about when composers choose the time signatures they do. This one is in 2/4 time but is full of triplets. Why not 12/16?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/11/1207:26 PM

Good catch, keystring. The reason it was missed before is that I was only concerned with finding the source material for the development.

M1-4 are the call and M5-8 are the answer but this is all in F. This is then repeated but this time the answer is changed in M13-16 for the transition to the dominant C major for the second subject.

Sonata 4, movement 2, andante con espressione

Originally Posted By: keystring

Did the question about mm 21 - 24 ever get resolved, Greener?

As I understand it, the outstanding issue was that Jeff wanted his analysis of a movement to F confirmed. He did a first analysis following Gary's account of M21-23 and then we moved onto a discussion of the dim 7 chord. He later posted an analysis of the full B section and we again went off on a tangent leaving him without confirmation but I did that when the smoke cleared so it was all wrapped up.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/12/1210:24 AM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Sonata 4, movement 1Sonata 4, movement 2, andante con espressione

Originally Posted By: keystring

Did the question about mm 21 - 24 ever get resolved, Greener?

As I understand it, the outstanding issue was that Jeff wanted his analysis of a movement to F confirmed. He did a first analysis following Gary's account of M21-23 and then we moved onto a discussion of the dim 7 chord. He later posted an analysis of the full B section and we again went off on a tangent leaving him without confirmation but I did that when the smoke cleared so it was all wrapped up.

Correct. I believe the final conclusion of this section is as below ...

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Originally Posted By: Greener

Since this section is largely construed from development of movement 1, would it be safe to say that we are passing through D minor, shortly visiting F major and then heading straight home to F Major?

M21 is Em7b5. Although the third is absent, it wouldn't be G#.

The rest is pretty much there. The C#dim7 in M22 is a rootless A7 resolving to Dm.

We end up in F, yes, briefly via Dmin, but in M26 the E nat makes it F7 the dominant of M27 Bb.

Is this you mean KS? Let me know if anything else. I'd be happy to go searching for any content we may have covered. If nothing else, I can help with that.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/13/1202:25 PM

Cute .

Sonatina #5, movement 3. Rondo, allegro molto.

I got stumped on something in movement 1 (maybe just because the discussion was in letter names, but I had it all labelled in roman numerals), so thought I would work up to mvmt 1 by tackling mvmt 3 first. Ha ha ha ha ha.

(Measures: I number my own scores, so my measures are one less than Greener's on this one. I'm showing both, prefacing Greener's with a G.)

I roared through adding roman numerals through measure 58 (G59), and then came to a screeching halt at the B section. No problem I thought, I'll work backwards from the end of the page, and use letters, and then work out the roman numerals. That worked for a while, but eventually it got harder and harder just to work out the letters, especially from about m. 92 (G93) backwards, and I finally screeched to a halt at m.74 (G75).

So then I thought, I need to listen to this and hear what these accidentals are trying to do (wish me luck, to me and my recalcitrant ear). But I haven't gotten myself, the score, and a piano all in a room at the same time yet. Bah.

Maybe I should go back and work through mvmt 1 first after all. At least I have that entirely labelled; I think I just have to get over that little hump to match up my roman numerals with the previous discussion's letter names.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/13/1202:37 PM

Sonatina #5, movement 3. Rondo, allegro molto.

Actually, it's not quite accurate to say that naming the chords with letters got hard. What got hard was seeing a connection between all the letter names. There's so much happening. This seems like a very fluid section. It's not just the incessant I V repetition of the A part.

Then along the way I was trying to audiate the B part, and found what seemed to be nice 8 measure phrases or subphrases to start with, and then that pattern vanished, so again I need to listen to this for real because I'm curious about where the phrases and subphrases are. Is it really a straight run from m.82 (G83) to the da capo, with no fleeting resolutions at all? No wait, re-examining it, the chords suggest a resolution at m.98 (G99), although it's not a real pause because the sixteenth notes keep rushing forward. Anyway, I need to play and listen to this whole B part to hear what's really going on.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/13/1202:55 PM

Sonatina #5, movement 3. Rondo, allegro

More on this: I had played through this before, but it didn't really register. I guess I was thinking "third movement, rondo, simple" and didn't register what seems to be going on. I now suspect from my harmonic analysis is "ternary form, A part simple, B part surprisingly complex, worth a careful listen." Must. Listen. More.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/13/1208:51 PM

Since this section is largely construed from development of movement 1, would it be safe to say that we are passing through D minor, shortly visiting F major and then heading straight home to F Major?

M21 is Em7b5. Although the third is absent, it wouldn't be G#.

The rest is pretty much there. The C#dim7 in M22 is a rootless A7 resolving to Dm.

We end up in F, yes, briefly via Dmin, but in M26 the E nat makes it F7 the dominant of M27 Bb.

Is this you mean KS? Let me know if anything else. I'd be happy to go searching for any content we may have covered. If nothing else, I can help with that.

Yes, I saw that. I saw the naming of chords, but I was looking for an answer to your question of tonality - whether it was just passing through a key before settling. I think the naming of those chords does define it as a passing through thing.

Meanwhile I've seen PianoStudent88's take on Sonatina 4, especially that by looking at the patterns in Roman Numeral analysis, she can see which sections fit with which sections. That makes a lot of sense, because if a section is, say, in F major one time, and in C major the next time, the notes will be different but the relationship of chords will still be the same. Therefore the RN's may be identical all the way or part way. (If part of the section is modulating to a new key as we've seen a few times, then it won't all be identical.)

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/13/1209:30 PM

Sonatina 5 - movement 1In the Development where Greener saw the D7, I am thinking that the D is actually already present in the pickup to that measure.

One thing I really wondered about is the Eb in the RH beat 4 of m. 37. The chord is identified as Gm, but what is that Eb doing there? The RH melody traces a diminished chord: G, Eb, C#, and that C# adds tension like (as?) an appoggiatura in m. 37 before resolving to D. So is that whole diminished passage a kind of tension which builds to the release in the D?

PianoStudent88 pointed out that m. 1 - 6 was not identical to m. 7 - 12, but that m 1 - 12 formed a unit. I see the same thing from the "call-answer" angle. We have a basic writing exercise in music theory where you write a 4 - 6 measure phrase ending on I-V, and an almost identical phrase of the same length, ending V-I. That's what we have here. P88 then pointed out that at the end of the piece, this 12-measure pattern isn't duplicated, and wrote of a coda. What I hear is that at the end the "call" part keeps getting stretched out and repeated. It can't get answered or the piece would finish then and there. So finally at the end it gets answered and finished. I guess I'm seeing the same thing, but haven't called it a coda (and maybe should).

- I do not see the first movement duplicated in the second movement. A 3 note figure that dips down and up again can occur anywhere in music. Personally I don't find the examples close enough to see a figure being deliberately repeated, but that might be my hearing.

In regards to when D comes in for movement 1, Presto, I'm with Richard that it doesn't really come in until m. 16 with a strong cadence. You do hear D, but it's ambiguous. D could be V of G major, or I of D major, and to me it doesn't shout out "key of D major" until m. 16.

Sonatina 5 - RondoEssentially what Richard and Greener said before. The second half is very interesting. I don't have anything to add. Trying to write out an analysis of the chords in this format makes it too complicated in written form.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/14/1207:26 AM

Sonatina 5Good analysis, keystring. I like the way you thought about the purpose of the Eb in the first movement to build on the tension and release. We have sadly neglected this aspect of the analyses.

Regarding the duplication of figures, this is a very subjective thing. Mathematicians look for patterns and artists tend to see them more than others. It is often remarked that children look like their parents but they and their parents are not so easily convinced. I was often told my brother and I inherited our dad's features and I often could see his temples and his eyes in the mirror but I never could see my brother in my face.

When my eldest son began to grow facial hair I decided to teach him to shave properly with a wet-shave and a straight razor. The first thing I had to do was remove my twenty or thirty year beard. I stared in disbelief at the reflection in the mirror, I was looking at my brother's chin!

I slaved for hours over Mozart's and Beethoven's sets of variations I dare say I now inject more into the music than the composers intend when I look for 'family resemblances' between movememts. But I also think it increases listening and hearing skills.

Sometimes there is neither a melodic, rhythmic nor harmonic resemblance but they seem to say the same thing, were they blessed with lyrics, and I hear that - a similar mood, emotion or inflection. Sometimes, of course, it's just the composers voice and I can't distinguish the clues that tell me why I hear it.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/14/1211:48 AM

Originally Posted By: keystring

Sonatina 5 - movement 1

One thing I really wondered about is the Eb in the RH beat 4 of m. 37. The chord is identified as Gm, but what is that Eb doing there? The RH melody traces a diminished chord: G, Eb, C#, and that C# adds tension like (as?) an appoggiatura in m. 37 before resolving to D. So is that whole diminished passage a kind of tension which builds to the release in the D?

I've gone back to take a listen to see what you mean by this, Keystring. Very neat. If I've got this right, we see this tension/release effect again at M53-54 and M61-62 (in these instances C/G to G.) This is all recap. so it would make sense we are recapitulating on the same theme.

Now, that you mention this -- tension -- where it is quite prevalent to me is in M42 to M45, but I'm not sure why. I see a Bb at the beginning of M42, but as soon as I hear the 7th in beat 4, things feel like they are heating up. Then to G7 in M43 and Cm-M43 and bringing in the 7th on final beat, then A7 in M45 ... Is it the compile of all the 7ths that is affecting this rising tension? At least, is seems this way for me.

Thanks for pointing out, Keystring. I've also gone back to understand what PS88 has identified in Air Suisse, and actually with you on the V I, and I V phrase endings.

Thanks for the link posts, as well Keystring. May just have to go get me one of those Alphorn things. Not sure about how I going to handle it with the elevator and all, but will figure something out .

I see were making good progress. I'll re-post # 6 when we are good to proceed, for ease of finding and identifying start of next Sonatine.

It is not a pleasant day in Toronto today, so another great reason for me to learn more on Sonatine analysis and some dedicated practice.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/14/1205:36 PM

I posted a long post about #5 mvmt 1 but I deleted it in favour of not making the discussion more chopped up, since Greener and keystring are talking about mvmt 1. I'll gather my thoughts on mvmt 1 tonight or tomorrow, and then when we're done with that I'll repost my mvmt 3 thoughts.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/16/1211:49 AM

Sonatine No. 5

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

I posted a long post about #5 mvmt 1 but I deleted it in favour of not making the discussion more chopped up, since Greener and keystring are talking about mvmt 1. I'll gather my thoughts on mvmt 1 tonight or tomorrow, and then when we're done with that I'll repost my mvmt 3 thoughts.

No pressure PS88, but just wanted to quickly inquire of how you are coming along.

I know we had been jostling along and varying paces before, so want to ensure we are all on the same page -- so to speak, -- before we move along.

I'm getting fired up for page one of No 6. But, looking forward to seeing any more you may have to share on No. 5.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/16/1212:07 PM

Sonatina #5, movement 1

Thanks for the nudge, Greener.

I seem to have misplaced my annotated score . My questions on this movement were about the progression in the development. IIRC, it's Gm Bb Cm D, and then the recapitulation returns in G. I'm just naming on the I (or Im) chords/fleeting-keys that are played after corresponding V7 (or related) chords.

Richard mentions that this is a daring progression, but I think he mentioned circle of fifths. I wanted to underline that it's daring because it's *not* a simple circle of fifths. Not only does it jump back and forth between major and minor, but it makes a big jump from C minor over to D major.

On the circle (or ribbon) of fifths, we can see the nearby-key movement of Gm Bb Cm, and then D major is far away (the dots are just to try to make this line up):

Eb.. Bb. F.... C... G.. DCm Gm Dm Am Em Bm

I'm going to have to look at the score again to see how the move from C minor to D major is handled.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/16/1212:13 PM

Not quite sure where to say flipping the switch, but these are the keys I believe we are going through in this section

I agree with you about sometimes not being sure where the switch flips, but I don't quite agree about the keys. More anon.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

The double blows that have characterised the three movements here are never far away in this double page middle section. But the triads are sparse and the harmony ambiguous. There's a V-I cadence in A at M75/76 and then we're off again into tonal ambiguity until D major appears to establish itself more as a dominant than a tonic not landing on a root position D major until M 107 (and even that is not a triad).

All harmony is ambiguous to me . But I am profoundly curious about the role of accidentals, and I hate having to just call them "colour"," so I have been wrestling with this section mm.59-112 (I'm using Greener's score numbers now). I'm presenting this moving forwards through the movement, but I only figured it out by first working from the back, and finding what seemed to be 8 and 10 measure phrases, and playing sections a lot, and thinking very hard about my scrawl of chord letternames.

Mm.60-63. Em B Em B suggests Im V in E minor. Confirmed by accidentals F# (for E minor's key signature) and D# (for leading tone). This is the relative minor of the piece's overall key of G major, so not a big surprise. The contrast of minor tonality to the preceding major catches my attention, even if just listening aurally I can't *name* what I'm hearing.

Mm.64-67. (Actually, I hear almost all the boundaries in the middles of measures, but I'm going to go nuts if I have to say "pickups to" and "first beat of" every time I mention a measure, so I'm going to see how much I can avoid it. I know, I'll follow the lead of Biblical studies and use "a" for first beat and "b" for second beat. Ok, mm.63b-67.). Anyway, the D natural in m.63 is interesting, but not unheard of in E minor. The C# in m.64 however suggests we're not in E minor any more. Where might we be? The phrase ends with the RH tracing F#7 over two measures, and the LH playing F#, which adds up to F#7 as V7 of either B or B minor.

Mm.67b-75a. These measures start off with Bm F# Bm F#, confirming that we are now in or passing through B minor. This explains the C#'s (completing the key signature of B minor) and the A#'s (leading tone). We're in the minor dominant of E minor, a reasonable place to be from the standpoint of theory and nearby keys, but actually quite interesting. I don't think we've met a minor dominant previously on these sonatinas.

This eight measure phrase starts out just like the first eight measure phrase, but the ending is altered. Well, no big surprise: we'd expect an alteration so we could end back at E minor. Except we don't; we give E minor a complete miss and end up on it's subdominant A, with a distinct ii-V-I cadence (Bm7 E7 A).

Mm.75b-85a. From A chord we move straight to D chord, and A the subdominant if E minor turns out to also be the dominant of D major. The G# sixteenth notes in mm.75 and 77 act in my mind to emphasize the A just above them: like an upside-down trill. The most interesting notes to me of the whole movement are the D#dim tonicizing the Em in mm.78-79. Are we leaping in a slightly wrenching way back to the key of E minor? Nope, false alarm, Em is just the two of a ii-V-I progression in D, with the V-I extended and repeated over six measures, and possibly dressed up with some vii° C#dim to boot (depending how you read mm.80 and 82, or perhaps m.84 is better read as IV, G).

Mm.85b-95a. There's a bevy of diminished chords suggesting the key if the following chord -- G#dim to A, F#dim to G, G#dim to A again, and a V-Im F# to Bm, but we never settle anywhere. That Bm turns out to be the leadin to a conservative vi-ii-V-I in D major, where we started this 10-measure unit.

Mm.95b-107. We flirt with A major again, via a G#m7b5, but it's just a brief flirtation (including the wonders of an Asus chord, and the pleasures of the suspended D resolving eventually down to C#), but really we're in D. The Em7 A D7 G of mm.97b-98a on paper might look like a circle of fifths return to our original key of G major, but try as I might I absolutely don't hear that G as a resting point. So I'd say we've just landed on the subdominant of D major, and then we continue solidly in D major all the way up through measure 108.

The C natural of m. 107 signals a change, and with several D7 chords at the end of this section, D ceases to be tonic, and as dominant announces the imminent return of our original key, G major, when we return da capo to the A section.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/16/1212:38 PM

I've been thinking about this notion of being in a key, as signaled unambiguously by a cadence, vs. other types of relation to key: fleeting, transitional, passing through, borrowing notes from, briefly tonicizing with a V7 I, etc.

I think my personal roman numerals which I mentioned somewhere not too long ago, with upper and lowercase roman numerals and slash notation for key (or perhaps merely scale) suggests a more definitive relation to key than might be audible in the sound. For example, in my personal notation (when I can get away with it in Baroque and Classical music) an A7 D7 G progression in the key of G is V7/V V7 I, which suggests that we are "in" the key of V (with the A7 in D major) before being back in the key of I. That's perhaps not a great example, because cadences like that are such an idiom that I read them easily as a variety of cadence in G. But dress the music up a bit, and prolong what's going on, and my slashes will start to make think we're really in a key.

Particular example that got me thinking of this is where I said we were in D in m.13 of an exposition, and everyone else said, no, not in D until the cadence and m.16. I think this was in Sonatina #5, movement 1. My slash notations (have to) start to show /V as early as m.13.

And I can't really hear any of this. Other people said they still heard D as dominant in mm.13-15. But I don't know what that sounds like. I have imagined that other people hear the C# intruding into a G major phrase and immediately make some connection like "that's from another key, and here's the tonic it suggests" and then they can hum D, or hear it in their mind's ear. But maybe that's not how even skilled listeners are hearing it at all. The problem is, that I can hear the eventual cadence as a cadence, but I can't hear that we've cadenced on a different tonic (D) than the original (G).

So now I feel like I need to add an additional principle to my paper analysis, which is "we're not in a key until we cadence in it, until then we're only suggesting, or passing through, or borrowing from, another key." But this feels unsatisfactory to me, because while it may produce written analyses which other people will agree with, I feel as if most other people can say things like this based on being able to hear the difference between being in a key vs. passing through it, and I can't.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/16/1203:14 PM

Richard mentions that this is a daring progression, but I think he mentioned circle of fifths. I wanted to underline that it's daring because it's *not* a simple circle of fifths.

Yep, that's what I was saying!

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

If you look at his path around the circle of fifths you'll find it's quite adventurous. He's achieved it using minor keys and playing on the fact that a dominant seventh closes into both major and minor tonics.

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

So now I feel like I need to add an additional principle to my paper analysis, which is "we're not in a key until we cadence in it, until then we're only suggesting, or passing through, or borrowing from, another key." But this feels unsatisfactory to me, because while it may produce written analyses which other people will agree with, I feel as if most other people can say things like this based on being able to hear the difference between being in a key vs. passing through it, and I can't.

I don't think it's that simple.

Other people can't say it's tonic precisely because there's been no cadence! It's not that they can hear that it's not tonic it's that they can't hear whether or not it's tonic until there's been a cadence.

You need good pitch memory to know whether it's a new key or the same one. When I hear a piece on YouTube I can go to the piano (half a house away) and play it on pitch. I don't have perfect pitch. I play an approximate pitch on the piano and know how far away that is. That's just pitch memory. That's how I know whether we're back in tonic or we've gone to the dominant.

You sing; can you sing the root of a chord you hear even if you hear it in an inversion?

If you sing the note, does it help you remember the pitch? If it does, that's how you can tell.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/16/1203:46 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Other people can't say it's tonic precisely because there's been no cadence! It's not that they can hear that it's not tonic it's that they can't hear whether or not it's tonic until there's been a cadence.

Hearing a cadence doesn't tell me any pitch information; it just tells me a phrase has ended. No, that's not quite right, because if you play me part of a ii-V-I cadence, I can hum where it should go. (I think). But I don't have enough pitch memory to remember if that's different or the same than the last time we had a cadence, a few measures ago. And even if you had cadences one right after the other, I don't have a good pitch memory even over a couple of notes to remember if it's different. And even if I can tell that it's cadencing at a different pitch, I can't distinguish intervals quickly and I can't tell if it's cadencing on a distinctly different note, or whether it's remaining within the same pitch *class* and just cadencing an octave up or down.

Quote:

You need good pitch memory to know whether it's a new key or the same one. When I hear a piece on YouTube I can go to the piano (half a house away) and play it on pitch. I don't have perfect pitch. I play an approximate pitch on the piano and know how far away that is. That's just pitch memory. That's how I know whether we're back in tonic or we've gone to the dominant.

These are foreign skills to me. Actually, come to think of it, I do have a little bit of pitch memory in very specific circumstances. Sometimes in choir if we end a phrase on one note, and start the next phrase on the same note a few measures later, I can remember that note. But I have to concentrate very hard to do it. Similarly I have to concentrate to remember the starting pitch from the piano rolling them off, to when we start singing. And that's just one single pitch, and concentrating on it very forcefully, and trying to match it. Not trying to figure out if I'm different by a fifth or by an octave from its previous occurrence when lots of things were going on.

Wierdly, although I can't sing an octave by itself completely reliably, I can do other things with octaves. Like if the basses are singing a phrase ending on my alto starting note of the next phrase, but an octave or two down, I can silently hum along with the basses in my range and get my starting note that way, quite accurately. But if you give me a note and say, "sing an octave", I will very likely be somewhat inaccurate, and if you play one note after another, I will have to cogitate very hard to try to decide if it's anything from a fifth to octave, even if I sing the pitches I'll still struggle.

Quote:

You sing; can you sing the root of a chord you hear even if you hear it in an inversion?

No. Definitely not. I can sing the top note easily, and the bottom note less easily, and sometimes I can find the middle note, but I have no idea of the relations between them (like, I can't hear "top is here, bottom is there, and middle in this middle place is a fourth above the bottom so it's a second inversion chord").

But I can pull notes out of the accompaniment somehow for knowing where to come in, and as an alto that means a lot of middle notes, so in context I guess my ability to hear middle notes is much better than my ability on an isolated basis.

Quote:

If you sing the note, does it help you remember the pitch? If it does, that's how you can tell.

It does, if I'm doing that thing of hearing something on Youtube and then carrying it across the room to the piano. If I don't sing it, I have no hope of matching it. If I sing it, then I can keep singing it and try notes at the piano until I can hear it's the same note.

Maybe these reductive skills aren't the right skills for me. Maybe there's some entirely different set of learning and assessing that would make sense for what I can do, and what I could improve at and how to improve at it. I mean, reading all the things I've listed here that I can't hear and can't do, you'd think I'd be barely scraping by in choir. But in fact, I think I do pretty well and feel confident in the music we're learning.

I think I get so wound up about this because my paper analysis skills are so far beyond my aural skills, and I feel so inadequate about my aural skills.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/16/1203:57 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Other people can't say it's tonic precisely because there's been no cadence! It's not that they can hear that it's not tonic it's that they can't hear whether or not it's tonic until there's been a cadence.

Let me try this from a different tack than my previous lengthy moan.

Isn't there a sense of whether a phrase cadences in an expected place, vs. an unexpected place? Suppose you had 8 bars in G, cadencing with Am D7 G. Then take the same first 6 bars, but change the last two bars and take on my brute force a cadence in a remote key. Say, Cm F7 Bb. Would people here that the first one cadenced in a natural way, and the second way went somewhere else, with a big wrenching movement?

Play them far apart, so they're not just remembering "it went this way the first time, and this other way the second time."

My belief about how other people hear is that they would hear it as something unusual. But I could be wrong; my general mindset is that I can't hear things in theory, but that other people can, but I'm open to correction that other people can't here them either.

All the same, I think even I might hear that big wrench in the second way. (I'm not at a piano right now, I'm just constructing an example that I think might sound more wrenching than the first example).

If people can hear that the second way does something unexpected or odd, doesn't that imply that they can hear something about what key those first six bars were in, even though there had not yet been a cadence?

(Of course if they don't hear that second way as odd, in general, then I'm going to have to completely rethink my theoretical construct of what music theory means in relation to the aural effect of a piece.)

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/16/1206:15 PM

Isn't there a sense of whether a phrase cadences in an expected place, vs. an unexpected place?

Yes.

Quote:

Suppose you had 8 bars in G, cadencing with Am D7 G. Then take the same first 6 bars, but change the last two bars and take on my brute force a cadence in a remote key. Say, Cm F7 Bb. Would people here that the first one cadenced in a natural way, and the second way went somewhere else, with a big wrenching movement?

*I* would if I am in the key of G major. I have a sense of where “home base is”, so if I am in the key of G major, home base is G, the chord, and D7 to G is what I expect for a really strong ending feeling. C D7 G is even stronger, and I would expect the last two chords to have roots in the bass, D to G.

Your Cm F7 Bb is logical to me. It is a smooth MODULATION, which can be a long one, going on in the key of Bb for pages OR immediately jumping back to G, in this way:

Cm F7 Bb G C G/D D7 G

That is I call “just visiting” Bb, or a “peek-a-boo” modulation. Pardon my silly expressions, but I work a lot with little kids who can PLAY this stuff.

Quote:

My belief about how other people hear is that they would hear it as something unusual. But I could be wrong; my general mindset is that I can't hear things in theory, but that other people can, but I'm open to correction that other people can't here them either.

I think your perception is extreme. There are people who hear so well, I feel deaf by comparison.

What would it be like to hear anything once, then be able to play it back flawlessly? It is unlikely that a single human being on this planet with a “normal mind” can do what he can do. But I don't enjoy his playing. He sounds like a robot to me.

There other extreme is a rare genetic condition that prevents an individual from perceiving music as anything else but noise. If you love music, you are hearing and you are hearing well. The fact that you do not hear the way I do, or the way someone else does, should not stop you from developing in any of a million different ways.

The D# in the soprano of m. 38 is still an appoggiatura creating tension which resolves into the D, sliding into it. At the same time we have the tension of the two major 7 chords which are only a semitone apart but in different inversions. That same feeling of tension and resolution is there.

Ebm is vi of G minor. That same Eb pops up in m. 39 as the 7 of an F7 chord.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/16/1209:54 PM

Reading through the newer posts, the word "cadence" comes up again. If my question was answered before, then I apologize, because I missed it. This involves the notion that a key is not established before there is a "cadence". Richard, we may have different meanings and this should be cleared up.

As I understand it, "cadence" broadly means that a section, phrase, etc., is either pausing or ending. This pause, ending, (semi-)conclusion is signaled by a number of things. Often the music slows down, and the sudden appearance of a white half note or break in the rhythm is visible to the eye. Sometimes we have a rest in the measure. There is also a chord progression that can go I-V, I-IV (the 'pause' part), or V-I or V-vi for the deceptive cadence.

Note the mention of V-I. The V-I heralds a cadence. But a V-I is not always a cadence. The problem is that when theory books teach about cadences they are lazy, and only mention these chords. Thus what we get stuck in our minds is that the combination of V-I or I-V is cadence, when in fact it can simply be two chords that work well together, but don't herald an ending. We use V-I and "cadence" synonymously, and shouldn't.---------------------I think that what Richard is actually saying is that we need something to let us know we are in a given key, settled down into it. This is often done through a series of V-I-V-I-V-I at the start of a new key. the V keeps pointing to the I and finally we "get it" that we're in that I (tonic). If anyone is studying the Sarnecki book, (level 1), there's a lot about "tonic prolongation". Here you are trying to keep the tonic going. some suggestions are:I I6 (C - C/E)I viio6 I6 (C - Bdim7/D - C/E)I V6 I (C - G/B - C)

The idea is that you have something that lets you hover around your tonic chord so that you hear it long enough to get the "C-ness" if it's in C. The reason for the V6 instead of straight V is that you have a gentle bass movement (Bass going C,B,C) which doesn't give a strong cadence (conclusion) feeling.

I think the idea is that you need to get pointed at the tonic for long enough for it to register. It's like those commercials, "We eat JackO's cereals - O - O - O - how good, Jack-O. SO-O-O-O jackilicious, O so good! Want some, Jack? Oh!" The O and Jack stays in your head forever.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/16/1210:03 PM

You sing; can you sing the root of a chord you hear even if you hear it in an inversion?

If you sing the note, does it help you remember the pitch? If it does, that's how you can tell.

I'm a singer, and suspect still function a lot like a singer. Chords don't play much of a role for me when I'm singing. I discovered a few years ago that I had learned something subconsciously that is actually done: bringing the 7 & 8 notes closer to each other than a semitone, and the same for 3 & 4. "Ti Do" slip together, and ditto for "Fa Mi". Of course, the "Ti" has an implied V, and the Fa is also the 7 in a V7. It's a different kind of hearing. I think that it can become confusing when mixing instruments that are so different.

The other thing about hearing is that some of it is subliminal and elusive. We hear things that we don't know we hear, and we don't know how. When we try to be too clinical about it, we can actually drive create roadblocks as well as anxiety. It's like the tale of the millipede that was asked how it kept its feet from tangling up, and then got too mixed up to know how to walk. Hearing has many angles to it, and hearing can also grow when we start pursuing new things in music. Some angles of it are probably personal, and different from one person to the next.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/16/1210:23 PM

Originally Posted By: keystring

The other thing about hearing is that some of it is subliminal and elusive. We hear things that we don't know we hear, and we don't know how. When we try to be too clinical about it, we can actually drive create roadblocks as well as anxiety. It's like the tale of the millipede that was asked how it kept its feet from tangling up, and then got too mixed up to know how to walk. Hearing has many angles to it, and hearing can also grow when we start pursuing new things in music. Some angles of it are probably personal, and different from one person to the next.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/17/1203:48 PM

Originally Posted By: keystring

Reading through the newer posts, the word "cadence" comes up again. If my question was answered before, then I apologize, because I missed it. This involves the notion that a key is not established before there is a "cadence". Richard, we may have different meanings and this should be cleared up.

My use of the term thus far has implied a final cadence (perfect or plagal) strong enough to establish key unless I have qualified it as an imperfect, or interrupted cadence - they are the only four terms I normally use to reference a cadence.

A V-I progression is not a cadence except at the end of a phrase when the melody ends on tonic (or in some cases fifth but bass is on tonic root).

When I'm discussing establishment of key I would not consider tonic-dominant harmony enough, on it's own, to establish tonality. If there's a change of key there must be a final cadence in that new key, and usually a new phrase begun in that key, before that new key has been established.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/17/1204:19 PM

Thank you Richard. It's important to have our terms straight rather than assuming. This is how I learned it too.

Ok, exploring this --- If you're discussing the final cadence, then it is happening at the END of the passage that is in that key. In practical terms in reality, something isn't right here. Music happens in real time moving from now into the future. So going by the idea that the key is established by the final cadence, our listener hears the music, and finally when the cadence comes, he knows what key he was hearing, or what the tonality was. We cannot expect him to then mentally rewind what he just heard, and re-hear it in that key. Hearing music moves forward, in real time.

In analysis we might get a clear sense of what key a section was in once we find the concluding cadence. But in reality, the tonality has been established before that. It has to be. I suggest that the ideas of "extending the I chord" which I brought forth are at least a part of the answer to this.

This is also why I was confused by your initial statement, since for me the tonality is established near the beginning, not at the end. I think that I understand now where you're coming from. I also use the final cadence as part of the process of establishing what key a passage is in.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/17/1205:04 PM

If you're discussing the final cadence, then it is happening at the END of the passage that is in that key.

I'm not discussing the final cadence but a final cadence (as opposed to an imperfect or interrupted cadence).

Edit: The tonic key is established with the first major or minor key harmony. That key will stay established until the key is changed and confirmed with a final cadence. In a sonata there will be a passage where the key changes from tonic to dominant. There will be an extra sharp added (or a flat naturalised) and new chords will suggest that something has happened and that we have left the tonic key but it won't be until the cadence at the end of the second subject that the new key is established.

In the development section new keys will be introduced but they are mostly passing modulations. If a new key ends a phrase with a final cadence and a new phrase begins in that new key then that new key will be established. Typically that won't be until a dominant passage leads us to expect a return to tonic.

No, you don't rewind mentally and say you've been in that new key but the final cadence should confirm your suspicions.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/17/1205:43 PM

I think that this is in line with what I wrote out before. I used "I chord extensions" as an example or something concrete, but it comes down to the same thing.

What do you mean by a "major or minor key harmony"? (It's helpful to have examples going with terminology. Not only do we have different degrees of knowledge, but we may also be used to different terms.) Thx.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/17/1205:56 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/17/1206:01 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

I mean a major chord or a minor chord not a dominant seventh such as would start an introduction. I'm thinking of Beethoven's seventh Symphony or his Op. 111 sonata.

A single major or minor chord, or at least two chords? I gave my example of "tonic extension" via Sarnecki. That kind of thing? The simplest example was C to C6; then maybe an example of C Bdim/D C6 .... we've got that C chord in there a couple of times so that the music shouts out "C". (RN's ... I - I6; I - viio6 - I6)

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/17/1206:26 PM

Back to Sonatina 5 - 3rd mov't - Rondo

I found the beginning of the development section interesting musically. You have a chromatically descending bass line mm 62 to 64 going from E to B (E, D#, D, C#, C, B). Then again mm. 70 - 73 from A# to F# (A#, A, G#, G, F#). Essentially it's the same passage, first in the key of E minor, and then in the key of B minor. There is a call-answer feeling to it. The passages end slightly differently since they are moving to something different each time. The second one then moves into a different theme, marking an end to this repetition. I just found this really cool. How did Clementi go from mundane and boring to interesting in the second half?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/17/1207:04 PM

I mean a major chord or a minor chord not a dominant seventh such as would start an introduction. I'm thinking of Beethoven's seventh Symphony or his Op. 111 sonata.

A single major or minor chord, or at least two chords?

Enough to establish tonality! An empty octave won't do it.

I know tonic when I hear. If a simple major chord is played in RH but the fifth is played on the bass has tonality been established? No, I don't think so.

Sonatina #1: C is established in measure 1, beat three, when the G confirms C major.

Sonatina #2: G major is etsablished on the second quaver in M2 when the bass has played the G and both D and B have been heard.

Sonatina #3: C major is established on the second quaver.

Sonatina #4: F major isn't firmly established until the A on beat three even though it's strongly pointed to (three F's and only F's on beat one). I don't think the C is needed in M2 to establish F major.

Actually I've just been all through Mozart's, Haydn's and Beethoven's sonatas and they all start on tonic except Op.111.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/17/1209:07 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/18/1211:13 AM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/18/1211:32 AM

Sonatina No. 6 Movement 1

We have had one week of catching up, some rest I suppose (let me know please, if not ready yet to proceed) and great further discussion on the establishment of a new key, and other discussion. So, will see how well I can apply this.

Exposition M1 - M38

D Major | A Major

A Major is clearly stated at the end of the exposition with a V-I cadence. But, tonality is shifted starting in M13. Where is it officially established? Not sure yet, more analysis pending ...

Development M39-M55

I haven't look closely at the tonality of this section yet, but on first glance looks for the most part that we are not straying very far from D Major.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/18/1201:12 PM

Sonatina No. 6 - Allegro con spirito

Originally Posted By: Greener

Exposition M1 - M38...Development M39-M55 ...Recapitulation M56-M90

Whilst I'm comfortable with your numbers for the main sections I'd like to ask a) if you're in two sharps, what sharp do you expect next, b) what reasons do you have for suspecting M13 as beginning the shift to A major and c) where does the harmony start becoming diatonic to A major but no longer to D major?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/18/1201:18 PM

I am ready to start on Sonatina 6.

I have been reading a bit about musicality on the web, and found one site which listed several aspects of musicality, harmony being just one of about six aspects. Interestingly, I discovered that my aural skills are just fine on the other five aspects.

I want to approach Sonatina 6 differently, taking a more aural approach (as I started to do with a previous sonatina), and also investigating the other aspects of musicality.

I am thinking about what Richard wrote about establishing a key, and realized: I'm just fine with that as a definition "cadence plus start next phrase in same key" -- or whatever tweaks you want to make to it. But I just don't hear that (except for hearing the cadence, but it doesn't necessarily make me hear or remember a specific pitch as tonic), so when Richard started attaching the establishment of a key to aural experience, that is all completely unusable information for me. (Not saying you shouldn't attach it, just remarking that I'm finally acknowledging to myself, in a neutral kind of way, where I can make sense of things and where it's just beyond me.)

Similarly with keystring's writing about the prolongation of tonic through well-chosen chords. I can find that on paper in a score, but it doesn't really mean anything to me aurally.

Anyway, after Gary's encouraging words I'm trying to let go of wanting my aural skills to match a certain preconceived idea I had gotten of what I "should" be able to do; and just appreciating what it is that I can do. Hearing harmony in ways that I can pinpoint may always be a weak point for me, but I enjoy music, and can play piano and sing (even both at the same time ) and dance musically (although not while playing piano ), so that's good.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/18/1201:43 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Whilst I'm comfortable with your numbers for the main sections I'd like to ask a) if you're in two sharps, what sharp do you expect next, b) what reasons do you have for suspecting M13 as beginning the shift to A major and c) where does the harmony start becoming diatonic to A major but no longer to D major?

a) G# b) Whoops, not M13 (just read it wrong) ... more like M16 when start seeing the G#c) M16

Edit: I don't have a good feeling about my first answer. But should know this by now. Sorry, need to dig up some previous notes. Back in a flash ...

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/18/1202:25 PM

Sonatina No. 6 - Allegro con spiritoSo, is M16 the end of the first subject, the start of the second subject, or something else?

I would suggest it is something else. Seems more like a second subject coming in at M22, and not here.

Question: the next sharp, (or next flat, as it may be) we would expect is always the missing # (or flat) in the dominant of the key I am currently in. Is this correct and an appropriate way to view this?

I will take a look at development. But, will await your post on this first, PS88. Unless of course, I get some tidbits I just can't wait to share.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/18/1202:55 PM

It's normal for a sonata in a major key to go from tonic to dominant. That's an extra sharp for sharp keys and C but a flat less for flatted keys. It's always a step to the right on your circle of fifths.

Many sonatas go to the sub-dominant before returning to tonic, that's a step to the left so it's one flat more or one sharp less.

Always the sharps and flats are added in the same order. All sharp keys have F#, the next sharp will always be C#, then G#, and so on.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/18/1205:20 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/18/1206:20 PM

Yes, the introduction of non-diatonic notes/harmonies is perceived as shifting tonality until a final cadence can establish it.

Perceived as shifting tonality? Oh no it's not -- at least not by me .

In all seriousness, people who can hear tonality don't perceive being in a new key until there's a cadence? Even if the notes from that key are played for measures and measures and measures on end, people who hear really just feel like things are shifting and they have no suspicions or expectations about where it's going to end up -- indeed, where it already is --, in the new key?

But by contrast they can tell within three beats of the beginning of a piece what key it's in? Why aren't they suspending judgment there as well and supposing "well this sounds like we'd expect a tonic at this pitch, but, oh, no, can't be sure until I hear a cadence?"

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/18/1206:48 PM

I deliberately used the word perceived so that it could be taken either as heard or as seen in the score - so much for my attempt at diplomacy!

"In all seriousness, people who can hear tonality don't perceive being in a new key until there's a cadence?"No, I can hear that I'm not in tonic but I can't say the new key is established until there's a cadence - exactly the same as when reading a score except that in a score I can clearly see what key the music is moving to/through.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/18/1209:14 PM

Ok, what does a key being "established" mean?

Is it just a definition? Something like, "when a phrase cadences in a new key, and the next phrase starts in that key, we say the key is 'mumblefrotz'.". (Replace 'mumblefrotz' with any other collection of syllables of your choice, like 'whizzty-gig' or 'diddlecue' or 'established'.)

Or does it correspond to some psychological or aural phenemon? Something like, "people who can hear this kind of thing have an up-in-the-air or incomplete feeling during the preceding measures, and only have a complete feeling when they hear the cadence"? But then how is that different from hearing a cadence at the end of any phrase that stays in the same key?

Or does it mean something like "For people who can hear this kind of thing, they have a memory of the old tonic, and although they can hear a difference in key, they don't feel satisfied until they hear the new tonic in a definitive way introduced by a cadence?"

Or something else yet again?

Maybe it's impossible to explain to someone who doesn't hear it. Like trying to explain a spoon falling off the table to someone deaf:

Me: "How did you know it fell on the floor?"

You: "I heard it."

Me: "Oh, OK, I can't hear it, and if I'm not looking I won't know anything happened, but if I'm looking and see it vanish off the table, I'll know to say it fell on the floor."

(spoon falls in someone's lap)

Me: "That spoon just fell on the floor!"

You: "No, it fell in someone's lap."

Me: "How do you know?"

You: "Because it sounded different."

Me: "I give up. I can see the spoon vanish but I'm never going to be able to figure out when I'm supposed to say it fell on the floor and when I'm supposed to say it fell in someone's lap."

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/18/1211:34 PM

Listened to it. Sounded like two movements to me, with the first movement 6 minutes long.

Heard interesting effects in places which I think were being achieved through harmony/shifting tonality.

Couldn't identify exposition/development/recapitulation in first movement. If it really is six minutes long, I wasn't prepared to be listening over such a long timescale. If it's shorter, I still didn't detect them.

I liked how it sounded, and how it was played. It's not stop-you-in-your-tracks like a Beethoven sonata, but it's lively, and orderly, and has some interesting and surprising sounds that I liked.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/19/1212:41 AM

Something that I notice sometimes is that the music will be going along, and then all of a sudden it will sound higher. I don't mean specific notes; I mean as an overall effect it sounds higher. I wonder if what I'm hearing is the key change to the dominant.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/19/1208:30 AM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Ok, what does a key being "established" mean?

Hmmm!____________________________

This, being a statement, would be read with a flat inflection but being a question should be read with a rising inflection at the end so you need to get to the end of the sentence to confirm whether or not you'll need to prepare a response. Won't you?

Some sentences read like statements all the way through and at the very turn out to be questions, don't they?

Isn't it the way, though, that some questions make it clear at the ouset that it's a question?

This is how I hear music. It's not until I get to the end of the phrase/section that I know if there's a 'rising inflection' at the end and if there is then I can expect another, balancing phrase, to complete the 'paragpraph'. So it's important to me to hear or feel the tonality at the start and compare it to the tonality I hear at the end. It tells me whether I'm listening to a question or a statement.

Isn't it nice when the question starts with the verb-subject order? You know right away it's a question. It's not as easy when the question part comes right at the end, is it?

And sometimes when you get a long line that you aren't sure about one way or the other because the question part comes right at the end, and after the main statement, like my opening paragraph, and it leaves you in doubt, doesn't it? Did it end with a rising inflection on the 'won't you' (requiring a yes/no response) or a falling inflection (not requiring a response or at least nothing more than simple agreement). If it's the former is the first sentence part of the question? Or is it a statement with a short question at the end? And if it's the latter is it really a question?

And even then, the question may turn out to be rhetorical and even though it's phrased as a question it's really a statement. Is it a long statement with a short question added afterwards? Or is it one long question, broken into two sentences?

So, sometimes we need to read the next sentence to be sure whether we've heard a question or a statement. Are we asking questions? Or just speaking quizzically?

A transition from tonic to dominant is, for me, a rising inflection. I won't be satisfied until I've heard the answer by way of a return to tonic. A resounding ii-V-I cadence at the end of the exposition may have an air finality, grammatically, but if it's in the dominant it is simply a large question mark. I know the question has finished but I still need the answer.______________________________

In Sonatina #1, for example, the exposition ends in G major, the dominant, with a final cadence. The development begins also in G major and so establishes the key - but it's not a new tonic - it's a new key.

In Sonatina #6 the bridge passage, M16, introduces G# suggesting A major and cadences with (a rootless) B7-E major - an imperfect cadence in A (it's not a final cadence in E because the E hasn't risen from D# nor fallen from F#). The second subject then begins in A so for me, A is now established as a new key.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/19/1208:31 AM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Listened to it...6 minutes long...Heard interesting effects...I liked how it sounded, and how it was played...it's lively, and orderly, and has some interesting and surprising sounds that I liked...[but] I wasn't prepared to be listening over such a long timescale

Jeff, I hope you're not spending more than six minutes on any of your analyses!!

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/19/1208:34 AM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Something that I notice sometimes is that the music will be going along, and then all of a sudden it will sound higher. I don't mean specific notes; I mean as an overall effect it sounds higher. I wonder if what I'm hearing is the key change to the dominant.

That's what I'm wondering, too! How can you enjoy music if you can't hear this stuff? Are you expecting the change to dominant to sound like the change from woodwind to brass? Can you tell a sigh (a falling semitone) from a question (a rising fifth)?

Can you hear this stuff and just not recognise that's what it is?

Caesar: "We're in the dominant now." Brutus: "What? I heard no fanfare, no drum roll! All I got was this little inflection!"

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/19/1209:28 AM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Something that I notice sometimes is that the music will be going along, and then all of a sudden it will sound higher. I don't mean specific notes; I mean as an overall effect it sounds higher. I wonder if what I'm hearing is the key change to the dominant.

That's what I'm wondering, too! How can you enjoy music if you can't hear this stuff? Are you expecting the change to dominant to sound like the change from woodwind to brass? Can you tell a sigh (a falling semitone) from a question (a rising fifth)?

Can you hear this stuff and just not recognise that's what it is?

Caesar: "We're in the dominant now." Brutus: "What? I heard no fanfare, no drum roll! All I got was this little inflection!"

Richard, how did you think up your disquisition on questions? That's brilliant! I should thank you profusely for it, shouldn't I? Yes, I should! [coda:] Thank you!

In all seriousness, that was very helpful to me.

It suggests listening to music and seeing if I hear a sense of question and/or answer, or openness and closedness. I don't know if I will or not, but it sure beats trying to listen for tonics and dominants and key changes. Anyway, it will be an interesting experiment.

As for enjoying music, I don't know. Black and white movies can be very enjoyable. Maybe sometimes there are parts I'm missing -- like watching The Wizard of Oz in black and white, you can get most of it, but there's a little extra ooomph when Dorothy opens the door of the house and a brilliantly coloured Oz is revealed. So I feel sometimes like that about listening to sonata form, that I'm missing that little extra oomph of "away from home" and "back to home". But there's still lots to enjoy.

I'm not sure if I can hear a falling semitone as a sigh or a rising fifth as a question. I can distinguish falling vs. rising, and I may catch the gist, but I won't be able to name what I've heard. I'm letting go of thinking the names are important. I think I can hear sighing easier than questions though. I think a rising fifth just sounds to me like "up, by a rather large amount." And I can only hear this rising rather large interval if played as a melodic interval; I won't hear it if it's implied through change of tonic, because I can't hear what a tonic is. I suppose it's possible I'm hearing it and don't know what it is, but I don't know how to get out of that state.

But I can hear in music "doing straightforward things with the sound" vs. "doing surprising things with the sound that catch my attention". So that's good enough for me; I'm determined to pay attention to what I can hear and not worry so much about these mysterious other things other people can hear.

In recent choir rehearsals I've been applying this principle (of appreciating what I can do and not beating myself up for what I think I should be able to do) to singing. I can't sightsing a line by stringing together intervals, the way some people think I should learn to do, but I can sing it in an approximate sort of way by some other means that I can't name (and it's not by moveable do solfege either). And once I can learn it, I can sing it well. So that's good. And my only challenge is pitches; I'm rock solid on sight-singing rhythm (with the one exception of singing three triplet quarter notes in the space of one half note). But even that last, I don't beat myself up over. I just think that's a hard thing, that I've very rarely done so I haven't practiced it, and someday maybe I'll work on ways to learn to do that better.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/19/1210:08 AM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

I'm rock solid on sight-singing rhythm (with the one exception of singing three triplet quarter notes in the space of one half note). But even that last, I don't beat myself up over. I just think that's a hard thing, that I've very rarely done so I haven't practiced it, and someday maybe I'll work on ways to learn to do that better.

Just chiming in here to offer a tidbit if it helps at all, PS88. I certainly can't offer much in your -- miles ahead of me -- analysis, and of course will leave that all to Richard, while I also learn from.

Is what you are referring to, like two beat triplets? If so, concur, it is a tricky one to get the hang of. My Father was a teacher, and I remember him spending a relentless amount of time with students trying to get this right. They would either play the first notes on the beat and off beat, or the last two. Never, evenly spacing them across the beats. That is, until alas, they got the hang of it. Finally, relief from all the screaming.

BEAUTIFUL he would shout ... now, do it again ...

This is the one place I would say, don't try to count it. Rather, hear it and feel it. It will come, and when you come across it again, go back to the other place where you have it right and it will come back again.

Not sure if this helps, or if this was even the challenge. But this is one I can actually handle pretty well now after having endured a half lifetime of agony.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/19/1211:21 AM

Greener, yes, two beat triplets is exactly what I have trouble with.

I think the last time we had something like that in chorus I started silently counting "1 2 3" inside each quarter note a few measures in advance, and then when the two beat triplet came up I could switch from counting "ONE two three FOUR five six" for two quarter notes to "ONE two THREE four FIVE six" for three triplet quarter notes in the same amount of time. Fortunately for me the leadup measures weren't in sixteenth notes: that would have completely messed up my quick 123 counting, as it would struggle against the quick 1234 of the sixteenths, and as we saw earlier, I can't do 3 against 4 yet.

I will see if I can feel it instead the next time it comes up. I just feel so lost when just trying to feel these, though, and I like the security of the precise numbers. Oh dear, this feels like it might be a terrifying insight into my inner psyche! I can see by the example of "what if the leadup was in sixteenth notes" that I'll need to get more comfortable with the by-feel method, though. Bah. Humbug.

Thank you for your thoughts on this. It's reassuring to know that I'm normal in finding it hard, and to know that progress can be made, and to know what kind of effort that progress might entail.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/20/1203:18 AM

Yes, the introduction of non-diatonic notes/harmonies is perceived as shifting tonality until a final cadence can establish it.

Perceived as shifting tonality?

Speaking personally, I'd say it's a "hm, that doesn't seem to belong there. I wonder if it's going to drift off somewhere else?" kind of a thing. Impressions. Nothing solid. A bit like when you listened to a movement back when some time and felt it was different in some way, and it had gone from major to minor. Hints of things that add up after a while.

I was looking at some piece and suddenly this F starts drumming in, intruding, and disappearing again. Then it came more and more often, until suddenly a bit later the piece moved into F major. It's like seeing a rare robin pop up way too early, and you notice it because it shouldn't be there yet. But at some point the lawn is full of robins, grass is sprouting, tulips are up and it's definitely spring.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/20/1203:23 AM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Ok, what does a key being "established" mean?

Hmmm!____________________________

This, being a statement, would be read with a flat inflection but being a question should be read with a rising inflection at the end so you need to get to the end of the sentence to confirm whether or not you'll need to prepare a response. Won't you?

Some sentences read like statements all the way through and at the very turn out to be questions, don't they?

Isn't it the way, though, that some questions make it clear at the ouset that it's a question?

This is how I hear music. It's not until I get to the end of the phrase/section that I know if there's a 'rising inflection' at the end and if there is then I can expect another, balancing phrase, to complete the 'paragraph'. So it's important to me to hear or feel the tonality at the start and compare it to the tonality I hear at the end. It tells me whether I'm listening to a question or a statement.....

I don't think that I hear it that way. It would also be too late for me, because by the time I'm oriented to what the key is and able to follow the music, it's already moved to a new key. I'd always be one step behind.

Usually the key is established early on. Often there are lots of V-I-V-I or maybe I I6 I or other ways of hovering around that I, right at the beginning. We hear so much of that I key that we concentrate on that tonality.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/20/1208:39 AM

Sonatina No. 6, Allegro con spirito

This fabulous little work is studded with very Mozartean touches.

We begin with a two bar phrase that is obviously full of the joys of spring with the descending octave at the close preceded by a delightful leap from a grace note an octave below. Barely able to contain itself in M2-3 a new figure in M5-6 tells of expected delights before the air of contentment in M7-8.

M9 starts three measures of excitement, again followed by the calming voice of M7-8. We are in D Major throughout.

We enter the bridge passage in M16 with the M5 figure and some more scurrying up to the brief contraction of the first two measures in the middle of M20 and twice in M21 before the emphatic knocks in the middle of M22 on E major, the dominant of the dominant.

The second subject begins at the end of M22 with a sweetly disguised variation(*) of M1-2 and M30 introduces a subtle three note sequence on F#-G-A hidden in repeated and broken thirds. This section leads up to another new figure in M37 before the final dominant cadence in M38.

The development begins with a "new figure", a two measure theme drawn together from the conglomeration of M1-2, M7-8 and the three note sequence F#-G-A in M30. It is played over an A pedal but repeated a tone higher over the same A pedal increasing the tension and building suspense. It ends with cascading thirds leading to a repeat a fourth higher and this time leads to a delightful play on the figure from M37 in a chromatic descent to another reminder of the F#-G-A sequence rising over a dominant A pedal to B and hanging on C# before the recapitulation returns on D.

Originally Posted By: Greener

Oh yeah, the keys

How about ...

Passing through, visiting, shifting but not committing to;

G minor G major A major

Where is G minor?

We end the exposition in A major and we start in M38 with an A pedal but there are no G's to show whether they're sharp or natural. Are we still in A here or back to tonic on the dominant? The next phrase has a ntural G suggesting the later and M44 confirms it.

In only six works Clementi has taken us to the point where anyone capable of a good rendition of this sonatina is well able to begin tackling the full scale works by Mozart and Haydn and not far from those of Beethoven and Schubert.

(*)I've spent all morning trying to link to an image on Box.com. Alas, I'm short on technology skills.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/20/1208:45 AM

Originally Posted By: keystring

I don't think that I hear it that way. It would also be too late for me, because by the time I'm oriented to what the key is and able to follow the music, it's already moved to a new key. I'd always be one step behind.

We're not talking about establishing the tonic here but establishing a new key. How do you know when a new key has been established? As soon as the accidental has been introduced? Or when all the harmonies are diatonic to the new key but not to the tonic key? Or once you've reached a cadence? How do you know when the new key has been established and is not just being visited or passed through?

You can't apply the new key to what you've heard in the past and you sure can't predict what you're about to hear so you can only apply the new key information to what you are hearing right now and that must always be in relation to the tonic (however you hear or perceive that relationship - and you must perceive that relationship, why else would 300 years of tonal music always have finished on the tonic?) unless the modulations have gone so far you no longer remember what the tonic is.

If a new key is to be established then you must at least end a phrase in that key if not start another in it, no? How do you determine establishment otherwise?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/20/1209:10 AM

Hold on, a minute. I think I know what you are saying, Richard. What has thrown this off for me is that you have been talking about the way a phrase *ends*. In fact, if you're talking about a new key, we're really talking about the way the new key *begins*. Maybe it's a matter of perception.

So you've got this music that has been chugging along merrily in the key of D. Then the music seems to shift but it's still in D, and then it starts having (in the case of this piece) some spatterings of G# which aren't in the key of D, but is very much the leading note of A as well as a note in the V or Dominant chord of A. So it teases us along until suddenly it cadences E7 A. And then the music starts chugging along merrily in the key of A. That's what you're talking about.

Well, the part that starts with spatterings of G#, where maybe it has Em for a while but is still in D, and then goes on having E (with the G#) hinting at a new key, that is the transitional section or bridge. That bridge ENDS with an E7 A cadence which announces the new key. It also BEGINS the new key. It then establishes that key for our ear because, as I wrote before, we typically hear lots of I V's or other combinations that hover around the new I or i, as the new tonic gets extended (emphasized through repetition).

This is also an answer to P88's question. I wouldn't hear it only through a cadence. What really makes me hear the new key is the emphasis of the new tonic and tonic chord of that new key.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/20/1209:51 AM

Although this doesn't look remotely close on paper, I believe M39 - half of M42 are coming from M1-M4.

Can you explain how you see this. You did better than I did since I didn't find anything at all.

I did not see it at all. I was not overly confident in disclosing for this reason. But, when I listened to these sections back to back, it seemed like we could take elements from each, overlay them and make a nice choral arrangement. They just sound very similar.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Where is G minor?

I had a feeling this wasn't going to be good.

Something PS88 mentioned awhile back (when you start seeing alot of #'s and b's together, I would expect minor.) Well certainly not a lot here. But I was trying to account for the Bb. I had a C# dim here or rootless A7.

I guess I need to stop getting so anxious about accounting for every accidental until a pattern is confirmed.

I then saw D A7b9 (rootless again) in M50, but that was as far as I got before hitting the hay.

Can we go over (summarize) all the keys in this section again? I've read all the notes but still not clear of where we think the transitions are taking place and to what keys.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/20/1202:03 PM

We're not talking about establishing the tonic here but establishing a new key.

I might regret asking this, but: what's the difference between a tonic and a key?

I might regret answering this but: the tonic lasts for the duration of the piece, the key is a more transient thing that's passed through until the eventual return to tonic.

"Tonic" means "note 1" of the (any) key. In C major it is C, in G minor it is G, and in G major it is G (in each case, the note). If you are in a different key because the music has modulated, then that key also has a tonic, which you can also recognize as the tonic.

When I wrote about "tonic extension" (I V I, I V6 I6, I I6 I) etc., these are devices that are used to make us hear what key a piece is in, or recognize it visually (by reading the music). The tonic is the note that the music hovers around, because it is in that key, and wants to return to. So if we recognize what the tonic is ..... where the music wants to return to ..... then we also recognize what key it is in. This is as true in a modulated section as it is for the main key of the piece.

Maybe we should use "tonic of the piece" and "key of the piece" to distinguish. The word "tonic" itself does not have such a restricted meaning. As for key, when music has modulated to a new key, everything functions within that key according to that key. Knowing and/or feeling and/or hearing it allows us to be oriented in that key. That's how it works for me.

By logic, the tonic and the key are related. One gives clues about the other. So this is important.

Unless your music is from a different source that is written differently, then I think you renotated it to show something that you see underneath. This isn't what is actually in the music, but you see underneath the music (possibly). Is that right?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/20/1202:58 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/20/1203:48 PM

Richard, I have taken your notation just as you wrote it, but started with the original from where you said you found this, namely measures 1 - 2 for subject 1, and after measure 22 for subject 2. Then put your notation of what you see under the original. (I hope this makes sense).

If this is incorrect, let me know. If correct, maybe it will help others follow your line of thinking.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/20/1204:10 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/20/1204:48 PM

I wasn't drawing from the LH if that's what you meant.

In the first subject I shortened the ornamental opening, changed the D and A into quarter notes (from dotted quarter and eighth) and mixed up the rising eighths into two quarter notes (just the D and F# would have done). These eighths are the notes you're missing in your extract. I also modified the falling octave at the end.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/20/1205:57 PM

Thank you for explaining. I think it was important to know what you did, because I could imagine a number of people in the group hunting for the similarities that you found directly in the music, and obviously not finding them. It was potentially confusing (and I was confused myself briefly) and now I'm not confused about what you did and found.

Originally Posted By: vrtf90

I wasn't drawing from the LH if that's what you meant.

Right. But the LH contains information that I felt was important after going back and forth with this. That is why I chose to include it.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/20/1206:16 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/20/1211:00 PM

Greener, on the mixed up sharps and flats around m.50, you remembered what I said correctly, that it suggests a minor key. Now to get more precise about finding which minor key.

There are several specific clues suggesting a key (even if it's just shifting and not established).

1. The sharp among flats is typically the leading tone.

2. The flats that appear should agree with the key signature of the proposed key.

3. The chords should agree with the key: for example if there is a dominant seventh chord, it should be built on the fifth degree of the proposed key. If there is a diminished seventh chord (or rootless seven chord, if you prefer), it should be built on the leading tone of the proposed key. (Occasionally it will be built on the second degree.)

Sometimes the implied key is shifting quickly, every measure or more often.

Applying these ideas to the passage that you suggested was G minor: are they consistent with G minor? If not, what different key do they suggest?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/20/1211:17 PM

A clarification on diminished chords built on the leading tone: if you want to call it a rootless seven chord, the invisible root will be the fifth degree of the key, just like in a normal seven chord.

The seven chord (rooted or rootless) and where it goes is really really really important in these sonatinas. Over and over and over and over we see a seven chord (that is, X7 specifically, or its extensions X9 or X7b9) heralding the chord (and fleeting key) with root a fifth below. See A7? Expect D or Dm. See B7? Expect E or Em. See G#7? Expect C# or C#m. Etc.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/21/1211:35 AM

Sonatina #6, movement 1

Listened several more times. The second time, I was able to hear where the exposition, development, and recapitulation happen. I did this by listening very closely to what the very beginning of the piece sounds like, and where I heard that again. (This is hearing melodically what's going on; I have NO sense of "I was just in the dominant, now I'm back to the tonic, this must be the repeat.")

What confused me before is that there is a big cadence in the middle of the exposition (and the recapitulation) so when I heard it the first time I expected that to be the end of the exposition. So I ended up hearing lots and lots of sections instead of just six (expo, dev, recap, repeated).

My latest listen, I listened to the LH, and that was fun, hearing how it's doing something different from the RH, and it has some nice effects of its own.

Next I'm going to listen, score in hand, and mark the places where I hear something unusual happening.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/21/1211:41 AM

Sonatina #6, movement 1

Something else I can hear is that the development ends in a very open-ended way. I'm not sure if the recapitulation starts in the only way that could complete the open-ended development, but it does sound quite natural.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/21/1204:13 PM

Sonatina #6 Allegro con sprito

Just a quick clarify, PS88. Your confirmation note about the flat around M50 was marked Sonatina No 5. movement 1, when in fact we were discussing No. 6 movement 1. I had also carried this reference through, not realizing it.

So, just wanted to clarify if last couple of posts are also discussing No.6 vs. No. 5.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/22/1212:30 AM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Sonatina #6, movement 1

Something else I can hear is that the development ends in a very open-ended way. I'm not sure if the recapitulation starts in the only way that could complete the open-ended development, but it does sound quite natural.

I had a quick play-through. It's got a feeling of "waiting for the shoe to drop" and there's a reason for it. From m. 55 to 56 you have A (V chord of D) developing into an A7 chord while we have "poco ritardando". It leads up to D, leads up to D, and then instead of giving us that D we end up with A7, the melody note being C#, the leading note of D, being held in a tenuto - followed by a tenuto pause. Literally we have a pregnant pause. Then "a tempo" the quick downbeat notes and we're back in the jaunty opening with the long expected D chord. Well heard!

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/22/1212:33 AM

Sonatina #6, movement 1, Allegro con spirito

Places that stand out to me listening (in addition to the pyrotechnics running up and down scales):

The up-and-down eighth notes in m.12 into m.13, and m.14 into m.15 (and similarly in the recapitulation). Curiously, while I can hear that the mm.14-15 set is higher than the mm.12-13 set, I don't register that it's an octave higher. It sounds like a completely new set of interesting notes to me, not just "oh that's the same thing, an octave higher".

The three quarter notes in the left hand from m.30 to the downbeat of m.31, and again from m.31 to the downbeat of m.32. Although they don't appear to ascend on paper, I hear the three dyads as an ascending sequence. This figure appears again at mm.34-36, and again in the recapitulation.

The accidental and dim7 laden passage from mm.48-51, and again from mm.53-56.

Try as I might, I can't hear the arrival of G# in m. 17 as an unusual note.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/22/1212:36 AM

Sonatina No. 6, Allegro con spiritoM9 starts three measures of excitement, again followed by the calming voice of M7-8. We are in D Major throughout.

I find mm.12-16 to be quite the opposite of calming, with the expanding and briefly chromatic up-and-down eighth note figure from m.12 to m.13, and again at m.14 to m.15.F#-G#-A (et passim ff.)

I hate to write of emotions since they are so subjective. What we feel is what we feel, and there is no right or wrong about feeling. Having said that, subjectively I also might feel a calming or settling down at that point. The music has been dancing up and down the scale in sixteenth notes, and suddenly we have a much slower dotted quarter followed by eighth notes. We have a simple D to G cadence, and the C#, C, B dance around the repeated D while gently drifting down from C# to B. The D octave in the bass also slows everything down for me, keeping it fixed on that one note. But as said, this is subjective.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/22/1212:41 AM

Sonatina #6, movement 1, Allegro con spirito

Places that stand out to me in examining the score:

All the parts that stood out to me listening. Plus:

I like the way the bridge mm.16-22 from the exposition change completely for mm.72-74. Despite being less than half the length of the original, the new bridge manages to squeeze in no less than three ascending D major scales. But lest he be accused of hammering D major too much, Clementi cleverly varies the bass over which these scales sound: D, then C#, then B.

I like the way m.36 of the exposition is modified in m.88 in the recapitulation. By changing the turnaround point in the scale passage in m.88 compared to its model in m.36, Clementi moves the recapitulation from sounding a fourth above the exposition, to sounding a fifth below. Thus he gets to have a high and glittering second theme in his recapitulation, but then descend an octave for a firmly grounded finish.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/22/1206:51 PM

Try as I might, I can't hear the arrival of G# in m. 17 as an unusual note.

Try playing that passage with the G's as natural a couple of times. It has a very bland sound but when you go back to G#'s it really lifts it!

Whether or not someone hears it as an unusual note depends on how they are hearing, which includes what they are naturally listening for, and what is coming in on a subconscious level. For example, I was more inclined toward relative pitch and hearing music in groupings that belonged together (I'm groping for words). I naturally shifted into a new key without being aware of it. That means that if I got the feeling of being in A major at that point, the shift would have happened at the same time, and there would be nothing strange or unusual about the G#. It is the leading note of A and it would feel like it belongs.

On the other hand, if I was more of a pitch-oriented person, who hears G as G, G# as G, plays each note separately according to what it is, then I would have been hearing all the G's, and that sudden G# would really strike me. Since that time I have learned to hear this way as well, which is why I'm aware of both.

Composers wrote music to be played by musicians, but to be heard by non-musicians. So they would write material that appears normal because of how it is absorbed subconsciously on many different levels. Some of those sensibilities also belong to the musician.

In other words, PianoStudent88 not hearing anything unusual may as much be due to what she does not hear, as it may be due to what she DOES hear. This hearing thing is tricky business, and has more sides to it than I once imagined.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/22/1207:44 PM

What about forming your own impressions, and checking what your own impressions are, knowing that whatever they are, they are right because they are yours? I think that the main thing this section does for me, is to tell me that it's about to go on to something else. I know it intellectually because it has ended on E7. If it didn't land on A and give a feeling of A major or minor, I'd be surprised or disturbed. But since it does the expected, it doesn't make a big splash.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/24/1209:33 AM

I am forming my own impressions, but I'm also interested in enlarging my impressions. For example, I've noticed that I often seem to be able to hear accidentals in the music: they stick out to my ear as something unusual. So it's curious to me that I can't hear the G# as unusual.

It's true that I'm particularly interested in hearing the G# because that would be, for me, the moment when the shift to the dominant starts (since I'm not trying to do what seems impossible for me right now, detect the shift to dominant by hearing a change in tonic). And I'm interested in hearing that shift because I'd like to be able to hear the parts in sonata form which are "home, away from home [shift to dominant in exposition], really far away from home [development], home again [recapitulation]." I may ultimately give up on being able to hear that, but for now I'm still curious about it.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/24/1210:45 AM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

I am forming my own impressions, but I'm also interested in enlarging my impressions. For example, I've noticed that I often seem to be able to hear accidentals in the music: they stick out to my ear as something unusual. So it's curious to me that I can't hear the G# as unusual.

How about ..... If Clementi decided to stick a new key signature into the middle of the measure at that point, there would no longer be an accidental. That's what we hear. It's the point of modulation.

I'm seeing this in colours for the moment. You could split a square in half, and colour one side red, and the other yellow. Or you could start smearing yellow and red together in the middle so that the red gets yellower and yellower, and the yellow gets redder and redder where they meet. There is a point where you can't tell whether it's red or yellow. (Of course we have a name for that combined colour - orange - reddish orange or yellowish orange). Is this nuts or does it make sense?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/24/1211:29 AM

How about ..... If Clementi decided to stick a new key signature into the middle of the measure at that point, there would no longer be an accidental.

I'm seeing this in colours for the moment..

There is a point where you can't tell whether it's red or yellow. (Of course we have a name for that combined colour - orange - reddish orange or yellowish orange). Is this nuts or does it make sense?

It is a good analogy for me KS. Accidentals will not be so apparent when they are not accidentals at all in the modulation that has taken place. Else, they may be very apparent when they are adding colour that is not in conformity with the key.

As a beginner student here, I would be more likely to notice (that is hear) a shift from Red to Yellow. But, when it is by way of Orange, I would be more likely to miss the smoother transition and then look back and say "what happened, how did I end up in this key?"

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/25/1203:14 AM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/25/1208:55 AM

Sonatina #6

I'm always game to go. I just see one more movement (Rondo) of this Sonatina. And, believe this is the first Sonatina we have come across with just two movements. Albeit the first movement was larger than most.

Perhaps, Mr. Clementi was running out of steam.

I had taken a look at the Rondo earlier in the week to identify the sections, and what I had marked was:

A - M1-M24 (I had thought of labelling M17 to M24 as something other then A, but changed my mind)

B - M25-M38

C (development) - M39-M63

A

Happy for someone else to take the lead from here on identifying more (correcting above) etc. I'll not have too much time to look at this more today as have some appointments to tend to. Also, my batting average has not been so great with the Rondo's.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/25/1204:50 PM

In accordance with Clementi's previous ventures into the Rondo form this is again ternary ABA.

A is a seven-and-a-half bar theme (M1-8), repeated (M8-15) and closed (M16-24). We're in D major throughout.

B is the remainder; variations of and ideas from the previous material. The keys are D major, A major from M27, through A minor to E major at M33 closing back to A major at M39 where another idea/variation begins and maintains the key to the end of the section.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/25/1207:39 PM

You are right, A repeats three times in the beginning. My bad. I still do hear m 39 - 44 as a close variation to A, which would go with what you wrote about variations. Since it has a development, is it a kind of rondo sonata-form clone?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/27/1210:19 PM

In accordance with Clementi's previous ventures into the Rondo form this is again ternary ABA.

A is a seven-and-a-half bar theme (M1-8), repeated (M8-15) and closed (M16-24). We're in D major throughout.

B is the remainder; variations of and ideas from the previous material. The keys are D major, A major from M27, through A minor to E major at M33 closing back to A major at M39 where another idea/variation begins and maintains the key to the end of the section.

This conclusion all makes sense to me, as well. Just getting back to this now and getting caught up to finish line of Sonatine no. 6.

Thanks again Richard, for guiding us all through the process and this quite in-depth study thread of Clementi Sonatines'. And to everyone else that participated and also shared a wealth of knowledge and perspective. Everyone's insight and free sharing, is very much appreciated.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Heaps more fun to play than to analyse.

Yes, I imagine it would be and I am getting quite a back log of material I would like to come back to and work on.

The entire process of analysis has and is, also fun and is highly educational for me. We (or at least since I got involved) have been at this ("the study threads") quite steady now since the Moonlight Sonata Study thread in mid August. So over 2 months. Doesn't seem like this long ...

Where am I going with this ... just that it is really great stuff and keen to move forward with more.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/29/1204:16 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/29/1209:43 PM

If we continue with the sonata we'd be working at a level beyond our immediate playing ability.

We have still have to cover the minor key also.

I have my own ideas about direction but what do other people want?

Any thoughts from the silent followers that make up our almost 29000 views?

What about Mendelssohn?

Not sure if the selections from the future "themed recital" are good choices for analysis -- they all look short -- . But, from a timing perspective there may be some interest in understanding the pieces better in preparation.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/30/1202:12 PM

I have yet to listen closely to the Sonatina #6 movement 2, and I hope to do so. May or may not have anything to say once I've done that.

Happy to go anywhere the group decides, and don't mind if it's playable by me at my current stage or not. Going to Mendelssohn will introduce us to a more complex harmonic language than what we've dealt with so far in Clementi, or so I believe, which could be a good thing.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/30/1203:19 PM

Richard, you have studied the various works. You would probably be a good judge of what is best to introduce and in what order from a teaching perspective for what won't make us lost, and what might be interesting, maybe in that order. (Hopefully not putting you on the spot). I'm fine for anything, and enjoying the ride. I do like Mendelssohn.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/30/1205:10 PM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Going to Mendelssohn will introduce us to a more complex harmonic language than what we've dealt with so far in Clementi

I think not. Mendelssohn's Songs Without Words, while perfect in their own way, take ternary form as the structure, rather like Clementi's rondos. They are a theme, an expansion of it and a restatement of it. Some of them have little introductions and codas, eg. op. 30 no. 3. But they do not test the emotions with dissonance nor stray far from the beaten path.

They are the musical equivalent of a sandwich. Nutritious and perfectly made, but not adventurous fare, harmonically, lyrically, or structurally.

We've already seen what a page of Chopin can do but we've also looked at music from more perspectives than harmonic analysis. There's a thematic analysis, a structural one, an investigation of the proportion and symmetry, the unity, the tension and release and those devices that send shivers down the spine and keep us coming back for more.____________________________

Are you after something simple that you can play yourself and analyse easily?

Are you after something more demanding harmonically but without the scale of a full blown sonata while you consoldiate your skills?

Or do you want to continue with the sonata and look at some of the major works?

____________________________

My preference would be to continue with the sonata but to go a little slower than we have thus far and spend a little more time on each piece. I'd like to choose pieces that are worth spending time on and learn them more thoroughly, not just to play them (or not even to play them) but to be able to listen to them and appreciate their inner beauty with an intimacy normally reserved for the performer.

A sample route - I haven't analysed any of these yet except the Liszt, so they may be subject to change - it's just an indication of my intended direction:

Haydn Sonata No. 60 in C major, Hob. XVI:50One of his more mature works. The other options would be either of the two big E flat sonatas, Hob. XVI 49 or 52.

Mozart Sonata in A, K 331What better way to develop pattern recognition skills than studying variation form? The Alla Turca is immensely popular. There are many others from the same pen if someone has a preference.

Clementi Sonata in F# minor, Op. 25 No. 5There's a reason Beethoven preferred that his nephew Carl learnt Clementi's sonatas rather than Mozart's. This would redress the balance after studying the feller only in his sonatinas. His major works drew the admiration not just of Beethoven but also Brahms and pianists such as Horowitz and lately Demidenko.

Beethoven Sonata in C minor, Op. 13, "Pathétique"Again, there are many other choices here.

Schubert Sonata in B Flat, D. 960Any of the last three sonatas would be worthy of time spent.

I don't think the sonata is complete without a good look at Liszt's B minor sonata, either. I know these are daunting pieces and we've already burned our fingers on lesser heat but I really don't believe we have to approach analysis with surgical precision. We just need to know what's going on enough to appreciate it a bit more. I can enjoy looking at Michelangelo's David or Raphael's Galatea without knowing how to sculpt or mix paints.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 10/31/1209:47 PM

Are you after something simple that you can play yourself and analyse easily?

Yes

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Are you after something more demanding harmonically but without the scale of a full blown sonata while you consoldiate your skills?

Yes

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Or do you want to continue with the sonata and look at some of the major works?

Yes ____________________________

Sorry, Richard. Not trying to be a smarty, but it is all good for me and really have no preference on the above. Although, the way you have listed them seems appropriate. The first Bach Prelude No. 1 we did, for example was a good pace for me, as I could actually read it and learn to play it and still keep up with the analysis. But, I am surely not going to do that with all of them. So, for me, I am really quite fine with whatever direction is preferred and will still be keen to follow.

My choice from the selection of Sonatas you have listed would be the Beethoven, Pathetique. Of the others I have no real leaning but may suggest we stay with Clementi for now, but on a greater work, before venturing off too quickly.

In some sections it might be worth looking at a harmonic analysis but in tonal music that's not as important as key. It's more useful for The Beatles. I only usually look at the harmony in cadences or 'interesting spots'. Of course, I do a lot by ear and sight singing; even when reading Symphonies in the miniature score series I can imagine the whole orchestra.

I look for devices; figures, themes, and motifs that recur in various guises, speeded up, slowed down, inverted, backwards, etc.

I try to break it into sections, look at the proportions of the various parts, contrasts between sections, tension and release, unity and so on.

How does it differ from most pieces in that style/genre/form/key etc.

...

I listen closely to professional performances for anything I might have missed.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/01/1207:31 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/02/1201:22 PM

Just some preliminary background information which is perhaps of some value as we get things underway again with Mendelssohn OP 102. These are just excerpts from Wikipedia and full encyclopedia content is here.

born on 3 February 1809, Hamburg, Germany into a prominent Jewish family

recognized early as a musical prodigy

was the second of four children; his older sister Fanny also displayed exceptional and precocious musical talent

Fanny became a well-known pianist and amateur composer; originally Abraham (father, a banker) had thought that she, rather than Felix, would be the more musical. However, at that time, it was not considered proper, by either Abraham or Felix, for a woman to have a career in music, so Fanny remained an active, but non-professional musician. Abraham was also disinclined to allow Felix to follow a musical career until it became clear that he intended seriously to dedicate himself to it.

Abraham Mendelssohn renounced the Jewish religion; Felix and his siblings were first brought up without religious education, and were baptised as Lutherans in 1816, at which time Felix took the additional names Jakob Ludwig. Abraham and his wife Lea were baptised in 1822, formally adopting the surname Mendelssohn Bartholdy (which they had used since 1812) for themselves and their children.

Like Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart before him, Mendelssohn was regarded as a child prodigy. After the family moved to Berlin, all four Mendelssohn children studied piano with Ludwig Berger, who was himself a former student of Muzio Clementi.

Felix was a prolific composer from an early age. As an adolescent, his works were often performed at home with a private orchestra for the associates of his wealthy parents amongst the intellectual elite of Berlin. Between the ages of 12 and 14, Mendelssohn wrote 12 string symphonies for such concerts. These works were ignored for over a century, but are now recorded and occasionally played in concerts. His works show his study of Baroque and early classical music. His fugues and chorales especially reflect a tonal clarity and use of counterpoint reminiscent of Johann Sebastian Bach, by whose music he was deeply influenced.

In the course of ten visits to Britain during his life, totalling about 20 months, Mendelssohn won a strong following, sufficient for him to make a deep impression on British musical life.

After a long period of relative denigration due to changing musical tastes and anti-Semitism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, his creative originality has now been recognised and re-evaluated. He is now among the most popular composers of the Romantic era.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/02/1202:04 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/02/1204:20 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Mendelssohn's Songs Without Words, while perfect in their own way, take ternary form as the structure, rather like Clementi's rondos. They are a theme, an expansion of it and a restatement of it. Some of them have little introductions and codas, eg. op. 30 no. 3. But they do not test the emotions with dissonance nor stray far from the beaten path.

They are the musical equivalent of a sandwich. Nutritious and perfectly made, but not adventurous fare, harmonically, lyrically, or structurally.

This helps, as I would otherwise have a very tough time in labeling this. So, will just present some findings and request direction on what to call it. If it is a sandwich, I see a few ingredients (perhaps a turkey bacon club) but will otherwise spare you the analogy.

M1-M4 phrase (call it phrase A) M5-M8 phrase (call it phrase B)

M9-M14 this is playing with and expanding on phrase B

Then M15-M18 is restating (albeit differently) phrase A

That is as far as I will go for now to try and get terminology corrected. Also, this is one clear larger section up to this point and is a good resting place. The theme and phrases within it, are defined above (I believe anyway,) and then further expanded on in the next half (or so.)

I also have all the chords figured out up to M18. This was not as easy as I thought it would be. And pretty sure, you may not be so keen on all my selections. Should I post these? It is mainly for my own understanding and we haven't looked at chords it awhile, so not sure if interested. Happy to otherwise though.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/02/1205:03 PM

This is a new kind of music for me for analyzing so what follows is mostly subjective. Btw, it coincides with what Greener just wrote (the restatement in m. 15).

There is a main theme or subject or (name?) going from m. 1 - 2, half a phrase I guess. This occurs two more times: m. 15 - 16, and m. 25 - 26. I think it's a significant part of the piece. There is also a prominent rhythm that we first encounter in m. 1 that I hear as "dah deeda da da" and versions of this also shape the music.

I hear a kind of main call-answer, where this main theme is the "call", and you might have "call-answer", or "call-answer-answer-answer". Sometimes there may be a secondary kind of call and answer, but the ones that really stick out are the places where that theme pops up.

Main sections for me for now: M. 1 - 8 feel "final" at the end of m. 8. M. 9 - 14 feels like a second phrase which is responding to the first part, but it's independent. The final chord both concludes that section, and leads on to the next.M. 15 - 24 tentatively as the next section, starting with that theme.M. 25 again has that theme, and could have ended on m. 28, but m. 29 - 33 make the end much more interesting with what he does harmonically.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/02/1208:22 PM

I get everything your saying KS, almost. The only big difference I see is that you did not see any significance, or closure at m18, where I did.

Going to go ahead with some chords now; I used the commas to try and indicate which of the four beats.

No need to go over this unless you really want to. I'm posting mainly to help me get documented and help figure out what is going on with modulation. Starting from C Major, I believe we are moving through G Major, C Major, F Major and back to C Major.

This is shorter than most of these SWW's but the treatment is very similar. I've just read them all up to Op. 67 and all the ones without repeat bars follow a similar pattern though with obvious differences in scale.

I can't help loving these wonderful melodies but I do yearn for something a bit diferent now and then.

Your chords, Jeff, look really painful.

If you look around a little you'll see the bass agrees with the notes that follow rather than the ones being being played with it. This is Mendelssohn's version of the melodic appoggiatura.

Look at M7 mid point. If you drop the F# in RH and use the following E you have a simple C# dim. Or at the end of M4 the BDF over the C bass just resolves to a straight C.

____________________________

I've been quiet recently. I have now submitted my recital recording. The final (chosen) take shows the frustration I've been having hooking my old piano up to a modern PC. I'm without a right channel on my audio out and don't know whether it's the soundcard, the piano or the cable.

I can't monitor the recording on the PC while it's recording I have to get to the end and listen afterwards to see whether a mistake was noticeable or not by which time you think it probably was and have lost heart in the take anyway.

The song (another without words but not Mendelssohn) lost it's beauty after playing it over twenty times a day for two days (and that after the two weeks of practise preparing for the recording anyway).

Recording is normally a stressful business ("If I don't get it right this time...") but when you're unfamiliar with the equipment ("If it doesn't record right this time...") no amount of practise will help. I think I've overplayed it - no wrong notes but no beautiful phrasing and the climax sounds angry!

I may leave it a couple of days now that I think I have the set-up in a workable state and try again before the deadline using my 'magic number' to change it. Shifting a PC to a temporary table far from a network cable's reach and without a comfortable area for keyboard and mouse is not something I want to get used to more than four times a year! It's effectively a day without a PC plus an excuse for my wife to mention dusting! Ah, me.

OK, I see the F7b9 now in M14 and like this. I wanted to call the Adim7 an F#dim7 instead as I thought this would be in better alignment with diminished naming F#,A,C,Eb/A vs. A,C,Eb,F#, but happy F7b9. As suggested, I will see about simplifying others. It is not a tough piece to play, but was tough trying to label everything.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

I have now submitted my recital recording. The final (chosen) take shows the frustration I've been having hooking my old piano up to a modern PC.

Recording is normally a stressful business ...I may leave it a couple of days now that I think I have the set-up in a workable state and try again before the deadline using my 'magic number' to change it.... It's effectively a day without a PC plus an excuse for my wife to mention dusting! Ah, me.

This is exciting. Glad to see you will be in this recital, Richard. I went and had a listen to the piece you will be submitting ... a very lovely piece and nice choice.

Sorry, to hear of the frustration you're encountering with the recording set up. I'm going to side with your wife on this one though, and suggest it is time to start dusting

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/03/1201:09 PM

Richard - off topic - recording. My DP "remembers" playing, but I can't bring it into the computer. I catch it on my iPod and then e-mail it to myself. Then I drag it into GoldWave and resave it as an mp3. I used to stick a microphone close to the piano which brought it directly into GoldWave. If I had to do several takes, I just isolated the take that I wanted to keep. This may be totally unhelpful.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/03/1205:24 PM

Originally Posted By: keystring

Richard - off topic - recording. My DP "remembers" playing, but I can't bring it into the computer. I catch it on my iPod and then e-mail it to myself. Then I drag it into GoldWave and resave it as an mp3. I used to stick a microphone close to the piano which brought it directly into GoldWave. If I had to do several takes, I just isolated the take that I wanted to keep. This may be totally unhelpful.

Not unhelpful! It's a comfort to know others have problems. I have an eight track recording studio on tape and plenty of casssette recorders but they're older than the piano (32 years vs 23 years) and I wanted to avoid tape hiss. My cables mostly end in phono or 1/4" jacks. My sound card uses mini jacks. I have a best option of three cables joined together to get from phono out on the piano to mini stereo in on the computer.

The submission was designed to highlight these kinds of issues as I've committed to the RST Mendelssohn recital. It's served its purpose! I have new cables on order.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/04/1210:52 AM

Mendelssohn; Op. 102, No. 6

As I listen to the performance of this work, below, I notice the definite disparity of tempo throughout. Some noticeable slow downs and speed ups. It would not be possible, for example, to line up a metronome beat with this performance.

"espressivo" is not denoted in the score as it was in the Chopin, prelude. But, is very evident in this performance. Also, I think it is very effective in strengthening the dramatic and emotional appeal.

So, just wanted to ask for opinions of this. If I were to try to perform this with an even rhythm/tempo throughout, I believe it would lack the dramatic and emotional appeal that this performance achieves.

I understand (and quite like BTW) the concept that the composer's work is done and that the performers work has yet to be done. Furthermore, I've always been inclined to play things my way. But, I am now trying to tighten up and apply a more disciplined/reasonable approach to expression.

I guess my question, thus, is: How far should I / could I go with timing variance in a production like this one?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/04/1211:21 AM

I've updated it since. I think it's a better job. How did you hear it?

Originally Posted By: Greener

I'm going to side with your wife on this one though, and suggest it is time to start dusting

Done and, er, dusted! But thanks for you support

Mendelssohn, Op. 102/6We haven't seen much use of dotted rhythm in Clementi and where we did, it was the predominant rhythm in two of the gentle middle movements.

Now we're seeing it thrown in the middle of otherwise square crotchet/quaver themes where it adds a lilting and lyrical touch. Every phrase makes use of it. It's preponderant in the phrases throughout the six books.

In the baroque the music was played in reams of quavers and semiquavers because the instruments didn't have much sustain (compare guitar music with that of the mandolin). In classical music the rhythm was broken up more squarely adding quavers in among the crotchets. Now, in the Romantic period, we're seeing yet more diversity in the rhythm (going dotty, if you will ).

It would be worth experimenting with how much to lean on the dotted notes and what effect it has on the melody in the different places it's used. Sometimes it's used to break two similar chords, e.g. M5, and other times to add to the appogiatura effect, e.g. M4. What other uses does he make of it?

Originally Posted By: Greener

How far should I / could I go with timing variance in a production like this one?

The rule is simple. You get the piece to a point where you CAN play it in time and then you play it with the timing you WANT. It's about you being in control and not letting technical difficulties dictate the tempo.

If you want to stretch the definition of rubato by all means slow it down where you want to and bring out the piquant effect but don't just cover a technical difficulty.

I don't agree with this 'play it the way the composer intended' malarkey because the composers were playing to be listened to as much as saying something and they were obviously saying it in a way that was fashionable at the time. So play it now in a way that suits our preferred way of listening. My two ha'p'orth - add salt to taste!

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/04/1212:26 PM

I've updated it since. I think it's a better job. How did you hear it?

I have not heard your performance, Richard, although I am very much looking forward to it. I just searched the work on Google, as I was not familiar with the name, and had a listen. I'm sure your performance will be better than the one I heard ... it's a lovely piece.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Originally Posted By: Greener

I'm going to side with your wife on this one though, and suggest it is time to start dusting

Done and, er, dusted! But thanks for you support

You got it, anytime, and glad the dusting is now under control, and working out recording bugs to boot

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

If you want to stretch the definition of rubato by all means slow it down where you want to and bring out the piquant effect but don't just cover a technical difficulty.

I don't agree with this 'play it the way the composer intended' malarkey because the composers were playing to be listened to as much as saying something and they were obviously saying it in a way that was fashionable at the time. So play it now in a way that suits our preferred way of listening. My two ha'p'orth - add salt to taste!

OK, this helps, a lot. I learned a lot of rubato when I was young and began applying it where it did not belong. A bad habit I picked up as a result of not having a disciplined approach to learning. So, I am more cognizant of this now. But, there are instances where it IS appropriate.

Now, I have a better definition of when and how to apply it when it is appropriate.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/04/1212:47 PM

Originally Posted By: Greener

Mendelssohn; Op. 102, No. 6

As I listen to the performance of this work, below, I notice the definite disparity of tempo throughout. Some noticeable slow downs and speed ups. It would not be possible, for example, to line up a metronome beat with this performance.

"espressivo" is not denoted in the score as it was in the Chopin, prelude. But, is very evident in this performance. Also, I think it is very effective in strengthening the dramatic and emotional appeal.

I totally loved the way this was played. Rubato or using time expressively is something that I am trying to get a handle on (with help). It appears that your expressiveness in timing needs to be tempered by the need to maintain pulse, which I think is more the rhythm from measure to measure, or maybe of significant beats. In learning to play this way it seems, like Richard says, you first have to be able to play it accurately without rubato. I think you need to know why you are doing what you do. Could we think of this as similar to what an effective orator does, who uses pitch, volume, and timing to keep the attention of the audience?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/04/1202:45 PM

Mendelssohn; Op. 102, No.6

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

It would be worth experimenting with how much to lean on the dotted notes and what effect it has on the melody in the different places it's used. Sometimes it's used to break two similar chords, e.g. M5, and other times to add to the appogiatura effect, e.g. M4. What other uses does he make of it?

To suspend the changes?

M11 - Gm7 to C7 in M12M12 - A/C# to Dm in M13 (a lovely change here and I think prolonged and suspended by the dotted quarter)

Question: M19, M21, M28 or M31 for example. Am I really supposed to hold the dotted note longer then the other notes just below it that are not dotted? This is going to be a tricky business ...

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/04/1203:19 PM

Question: M19, M21, M28 or M31 for example. Am I really supposed to hold the dotted note longer then the other notes just below it that are not dotted?

Imagine the dotted quaver as three semi's tied. It's just like quarter notes in one hand and eighths in the other. Take each measure on it's own.

Re-write the measure if you like with a half-inch between each semi so you get an easier to read visual of the rhythm. Once you get it right mechanically (and too slow to count) you can start playing at a countable tempo. Playing at a countable tempo means two things: 1. you've got it and 2. all you need to do now is play it often enough for it to reach recital tempo, naturally and in its own time, just from consistent repetition.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/04/1203:52 PM

How do I explain it? It sounds more melodic, floating, dancing vs., what it would be without the dotted eighth.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Imagine the dotted quaver as three semi's tied. It's just like quarter notes in one hand and eighths in the other.

OK, this shouldn't be so bad. I've looked at all the places where this occurs and most will actually be straight forward. But, I had been omitting to this point.

In M31 it starts with a chord containing a dotted "g" and the very next eighth chord also contains a "g" again. How is this possible? It must be a misprint. I either need to tie them (there is no tie) or play the g again in which case the first g should not have been dotted.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/04/1204:01 PM

Mendelssohn, Op. 102/6

Originally Posted By: Greener

In M31 it starts with a chord containing a dotted "g" and the very next eighth chord also contains a "g" again. How is this possible? It must be a misprint. I either need to tie them (there is no tie) or play the g again in which case the first g should not have been dotted.

Or, what am I missing?

That's a dot over/under the note not alongside it. Those indicate staccato - like the eighth notes in M2.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/04/1205:07 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/05/1210:06 AM

Let's work in tranches and do an easy/playable piece, something more adventurous then another sonata. Then we can look at the next tranche.

How about Mendelssohn's Op. 102 No. 6, then Schubert's Moment Musical No. 6 and then Haydn's Sonata no. 50? I want to keep the sonatas in a chronological/progressive order.

Is there any more to talk about with this Op? I hate to leave it so soon if there is. I quite like this one and glad will have in my portfolio now. Also agree that this has been an easy one to learn. At least it has been for me, as it is about my speed for slowly reading and learning, and can't find an easier key. Bringing up to tempo and performance/presentation standard will be another matter. But, lots of time for this.

Shall I start preparing Schubert? Or, do we want to look at any more Mendelsshohn (if we are complete with this one?) Perhaps, your recital selection, Richard. Or, perhaps we could encourage Keystring and PS88 to choose a selection for this themed recital (March time frame it is looking like) as well, and take a look at those.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/05/1210:59 AM

I see discussions on the chords, and the chords do give a general idea of how the piece moves, and I see discussions about notes overlapping other notes, and appoggiatura effect etc. But I don't get a picture of the piece itself. If we're discussing sonata form - does this have a form? Is there more to it?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/05/1201:03 PM

This is a song form. It might be used in a sonata movement - it's not that far removed from Clementi's middle movements.

We've already examined the structure of the phrases, viz 4 + 4 + 6 + 4, repeat the last two and add a 4 bar coda.

You might want to look at the structure of the individual phrases to see how he has avoided squareness. We know he's employed dotted rhythm, and we've seen that this has been introduced by the Romantics, but look at what else he's done.

The first two bars feature a rising sequence from G to E not D. So he's used a five note sequence instead of 4 and missed the D in the ascent (that could have been another quaver pair with C with or without dotting) and he's accommodated the descent back to G from D instead of E by duplicating the A as an appoggiatura.

Look how he's chosen to get from E to C in M5-6 melodically and how he's harmonised it. He's added F#'s for a chromatic rise and then added the D major chords over a C base instead of dropping the bass to D as I would have done. Then look at how he's avoided predictability with the end of the phrase in M8. That's not among any of the choices I'd have come up with.

Then he's used a six measure phrase for line 3 to avoid the four square-ness. See how subtly the bass has changed in the repeat of the these last two phrases.

Also, each time we start at C and pass through C7(Tension), F resolve, Fdim7(more tension) to C resolve. The final Fdim7 (end of M31) brings in the high F before descending and ascending through the final C resolve.

I'm sure there is an easier way to describe it, but this is my take on it.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/05/1203:17 PM

Songs were called songs because they were sung. This is called a song because it's written in a melodic style. A sonata was a sound piece as opposed to a sung piece.

Schubert began the move towards song like writing in his Impromptu's and Moments Musicaux. It influenced the Romantic move towards this shorter song-like style of lyrical music. They couldn't very well continue in the Beethoven tradition. He'd pushed the boundaries too far. Mendelssohn, Chopin and Schumann picked up on this idea and led the Romantic movement with it but it was Schubert's genius originally.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/05/1203:30 PM

The coda is bringing the piece to a close. He begins in M28, drawing out the bass C to prevent closure on beat three. In the bass he's rising up from the C to an expected octave but doesn't quite make it. When you expect a third one he throws in a rather wonderful cadential left hand with a really unexpected dissonant CB while the RH figure is condensed to lead into the final C major triads in M32.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/06/1212:04 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

The coda is bringing the piece to a close. He begins in M28, drawing out the bass C to prevent closure on beat three. In the bass he's rising up from the C to an expected octave but doesn't quite make it. When you expect a third one he throws in a rather wonderful cadential left hand with a really unexpected dissonant CB while the RH figure is condensed to lead into the final C major triads in M32.

Yes, I had this as well.

The work to me is very reminiscent of a Hymn. I'm not sure why, since it does not have words. Perhaps the pace and progression of chords.

In listening to the posted performance again, I find it interesting how the various instances of staccato are treated. That is, hardly noticeable in first phrases. More noticeable beginning around M19 forward and very distinctive at M26-M27. I suppose, this is just at the discretion of the performer, and their interpretation of the piece. Without hearing and preferring a particular treatment I may otherwise be inclined to do things quite differently.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/06/1202:45 PM

Mendelssohn, Op. 102/6

Originally Posted By: Greener

Yes, I had this as well.

I figured you had it but we needed it saying for those following!

So, we've looked at a song without words and we've seen changes in the musical language, to wit, shorter and more lyrical forms and wider use of dotted rhythm within a phrase (as opposed to the use of dotted rhythm throughout the phrase).

Originally Posted By: Greener

The work to me is very reminiscent of a Hymn. I'm not sure why...

It's partly that he's using very rich harmony. Not just melody and accompaniment as a Chopin Nocturne or Mazurka might but almost polyphonic, look at M13-14, for example.

Mendelssohn was very much influenced by Bach (what great composer wasn't?) and turned his hand to preludes and fugues (and polyphonic writing generally) better than almost anyone else after Bach._________________________

If everyone's finished with this little piece we can move on by going a little backward in time and look at Schubert's sixth musical moment.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/07/1212:00 PM

Born on January 31, 1797, in Himmelpfortgrund, Austria, Franz Peter Schubert demonstrated an early gift for music. As a child, his talents included an ability to play the piano, violin and organ. He was also an excellent singer.

Schubert enrolled at the Stadtkonvikt, which trained young vocalists so they could one day sing at the chapel of the Imperial Court, and in 1808 he earned a scholarship that awarded him a spot in the court's chapel choir. Schubert played the violin in the students' orchestra, was quickly promoted to leader, and conducted in Ruzicka's absence. He also attended choir practice and, with his fellow pupils, practiced chamber music and piano playing.

Between 1813 and 1815, Schubert proved to be a prolific songwriter. By 1814, the young composer had written a number of piano pieces, and had produced string quartets, a symphony, and a three-act opera.

Schubert had his struggles as well. In 1820, he was hired by two opera houses, the Karthnerthof Theatre and Theatre-an-der-Wein, to compose a pair of operas, neither of which fared very well. Music publishers, meanwhile, were afraid to take a chance on a young composer like Schubert, whose music was not considered traditional.

His fortunes began to change in 1821, when, with the help of some friends, he began offering his songs on a subscription basis. Money started coming his way. In Vienna especially, Schubert's harmonious songs and dances were popular. Across the city, concert parties called Schubertiaden sprung up in the homes of wealthy residents.

By late 1822, however, Schubert encountered another difficult period. His financial needs going unmet, and his friendships increasingly strained, Schubert's life was further darkened when he became severely sick—historians believe he almost certainly contracted syphilis.

And yet, Schubert continued to produce at a prolific rate. None of the finished pieces, however, brought him the fortune he deserved or so greatly needed. For a time, Schubert, almost constantly penniless, returned to teaching. He also continued to write ...

In 1827, no doubt influenced by the passing of Ludwig van Beethoven and his impressive musical legacy, Schubert channeled a bit of the late composer and created a string of pieces. This work included the first 12 songs of the "Winterreise," as well as the "Piano Sonata in C Minor" and two piano solos, "Impromptus" and "Moments Musicaux."

It was only after Schubert's passing that his musical genius received the kind of recognition it deserved. His talent lay in is ability to adapt to almost any kind of musical form.

It is no secret that Schubert adored Beethoven—he was awed by him, to the point that he was too timid to even introduce himself to the musical giant when the two passed one another on the streets of Vienna. But it is far from a stretch to mention these two musical giants in the same sentence.

In 1872, a memorial to Schubert was constructed in the Stadtpark in Vienna. In 1888, his grave, along with Beethoven's, was relocated to Zentralfriedhof, the Viennese cemetery that is among the largest in the world. There, Schubert was placed alongside fellow musical giants Johann Strauss II and Johannes Brahms.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/08/1201:38 AM

Schubert; Op. 94, No. 6

Minuet and Trio form, with a da capo to the minuet. Or at least, it's in 3/4 time; I'm not sure I'd say it's really a minuet. Several repeats along the way. Key changes back and forth between Ab major and E major, and the Trio in Db major. (I did consider whether any of these might be minor, but the tonic chord for each major key appears right away in each section.). Db is maybe not so surprising, being the subdominant of Ab. But E is distinctly surprising, as is Schubert's method of moving in and out of these keys.

That's from examining the score. Now I'm curious as to what this sounds like. But either my piano is desperately out of tune, or the charms of this piece are not revealed when played at a dirge-like tempo, because my attempt to play, slowly through the piece sounded horrible, horrible, horrible. And my iPhone for some weird reason won't let me play the video Greener linked to (I think this is just an iPhone oddity, though, and I'll be able to listen from my work computer tomorrow.). So I don't know what it sounds like yet.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/08/1209:11 AM

Schubert; Op. 94, No. 6

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Now I'm curious as to what this sounds like. But either my piano is desperately out of tune, or the charms of this piece are not revealed when played at a dirge-like tempo, because my attempt to play, slowly through the piece sounded horrible, horrible, horrible.

It must be the piano, PS88. I find there is some lovely rich harmony in this, and also find it to be really quite pretty.

I had a hard time following this. That is, the first time through, all the repeats occur. Then I was expecting the piece to end at M115. But instead ... back to the beginning, without repeats this time and only up to M77 where it ends.

So, Allegretto D.C. means, go back to the beginning? And also the positioning of the thin and bolder lines at the end of each section actually matter? It seems to make sense now, but only after an intense head scratch.

The only other thing I would suggest with the keys is ... Ab Minor in the section just before the Trio and also closing out the piece in this dreary context. Although, the D natural bothers me in this section and I don't know what to make of it.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/08/1209:43 AM

Schubert, Op. 94/6, Allegretto

In Bach's day the suite developed from a concatenation of movements in dance style of which one was the minuet.

The suite typically consisted of an optional prelude, then an Allemande, Courante and Sarabande. Between those and the final Gigue was another dance and it's double, a Minuet was the most common but there were also Gavottes, Loures, Bourées, Passepieds, etc.

It was the French style, I believe, that started the fashion of three part harmony in the 'double' that gave rise to it being called a trio. Haydn and Mozart continued the tradition of keeping a minuet in their sonatas. It was Beethoven who replaced the Minuet with the scherzo.

The form then is binary for the minuet, binary again for the double, followed by a final run through of the first without repeats.

Schubert has called this piece an Allegretto and the instruction at the end of the trio is Allegretto D.C. It is therefore not a stretch to call this an Allegretto and Trio. If you know how to dance a minuet you'll also know that this is decidedly not one.

I once again have visions of a viridescent Canadian performing a waltz to this and this time accompanied by an Argentinian Tangoist attempting a minuet to it.

____________________________

The death of Beethoven in 1827 and Schubert in 1828 marked the end of an extraordinary half century in Vienna that came to be called the Classical period in music. Music before Haydn was centred around many European cities and, after the death of these last two giants, such was to be the case again, however influential Paris may have seemed on its own. Vienna also reclaimed some glory with Brahms, Bruckner, Mahler and Wolff and the Second Viennese School' of Berg, Schoenberg and Webern.

The sonata principle developed out of the Baroque binary form was was all about tonality. A piece began in tonic, moved to the dominant or dominant substitute, modulated then moved back to tonic. Sonata form is thematic within the key structure. For Haydn, the second themes were frequently derived from the first, often beginning with similar intervals but finishing differently. Mozart and Beethoven preferred contrasting themes to bring out more of the drama between the two keys.

Haydn and Mozart both had fame and royal patronage and Beethoven moved towards a more freelance position, though he too enjoyed royal patronage but they were more at his beck and call rather him to theirs.

After Schubert there was a greater divide between artistic composers and commercial composers, or at least, the divide became more sharply contrasted.

In his symphonies he turned the sonata key principle to suit his own style of music. His unfinished symphony in B minor recapitulated the second theme in D major instead of B major/B minor. In another (I forget which one) he recapitulated the first theme in the subdominant so that he wouldn't have to change the bridge passage.

Schubert realised that Beethoven had stretched tonality and modulation so far that listeners could no longer follow or recognise the key structures so it was no longer necessary to observe them as a convention. Classical music became more and more thematic and he himself introduced longer and more lyrical themes. The audience ability to recognise a returning theme, whatever key it was in, became more important.

His Wanderer Fantasy was transcribed by Franz Liszt who was inspired by it to write what I regard as the crowning achievement of sonata form, the B minor Sonata, a masterpiece of thematic writing.

In his last years he produced his Impromptus amd Moments Musicaux which were to be enormously influential to the Romantics that followed. He became a source of inspiration for them and saved them from having to follow an act like Beethoven.

In many ways, then, Schubert was at the cusp of musical history. He closed off the classical era and became the gateway to a new dawn. The shortest lived of all the great composers but by no means the least prolific nor influential. His inventive lyricism and his ability to handle keys is second to none and his mastery of form reserves a place for him in the very front rank of all the great composers.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/08/1210:13 AM

Schubert Opus 94 Number 6

OK, I'm a terrible churl. I've given it a listen, and I found it boring. (I don't like Schubert lieder either.)

To check out my perceptions, I hunted up my Themed Recital piece on Youtube (Satie's Gymnopédie 3), and I find it intriguing (although the recording I found was played at about twice the proper speed; I don't know what I'd think of it played at the proper "lent et grave" tempo). This probably just confirms to some of you (Richard I'm looking at you ) that my perceptions are really out of whack.

I found the Mendelssohn uninteresting also, until I started to play through it, and then it started to intrigue me. So maybe if I could play through the Schubert I would start to discover it and find it more interesting. But it seems to be slightly too many big chords for me to read fluently, even at a slow pace.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/08/1211:19 AM

We don't want you being bored. (You listen to Satie who allows enough time between bars to read the paper but you find Schubert boring? Hmmm!)

There are five other MM to choose from or eight Impromptu's. I'll go through any of them with you or you might try and persuade the others to change piece. I'm fine either way. But I don't want you, of all people, missing out on one of the finest exporers of key.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/08/1212:12 PM

Schubert Opus 94 Number 6

I expect I'll find it more interesting as I delve into the harmonies more. I'm intrigued by his writing of E7 enharmonically with a bunch of flats, before shifting key signature to E major. I called it quits for the night before getting to the Trio, or really grappling with his harmony throughout. I'll tackle it again tonight.

I'm also looking at the unity tieing his phrases together, and the variety differentiating them from each other.

Maybe I should try playing just the top notes, with select bass notes, as a start on a skeleton of the piece. I have had very little practice playing heavily chorded pieces like this; this is a big gap that I want to fix.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/08/1201:25 PM

Schubert, Op. 94/6, AllegrettoIn

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

I once again have visions of a viridescent Canadian performing a waltz to this ...

You can go ahead and dispel this notion, Richard. Indeed, when I saw the waltz like time signature I right away went to the closet to dig out my dancing gear. But unfortunately, packed it all back away again (in utter frustration and disappointment,) shortly thereafter .

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/08/1204:51 PM

Richard, do I understand that this is part of a suite then? I think my theory book has a write up about Minuet form. All that we had so far is that this was a piece called Allegretto, with a performance and link to the score. A lot of us are in different stages of learning.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/08/1205:29 PM

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

Schubert; Op. 94, No. 6

Now I'm curious as to what this sounds like. But either my piano is desperately out of tune, or the charms of this piece are not revealed when played at a dirge-like tempo, because my attempt to play, slowly through the piece sounded horrible, horrible, horrible.

I'm going for subjective rather than "knowledgeable" impressions, (especially since I don't have that much knowledge here).

Mostly I was observing chords, and some movement in the music. There is a huge particular contrast between the main part and the Trio part. The main part has a lot of minor chords, and there is a lot of chromatic movement going up and down. The progressions themselves are not as "usual" as in the first music that we analyzed. All together it feels a bit sadder, more unsettling. The chromatic movement makes me think of the shark theme from (lost the name of the movie suddenly). All of that together may give this unsettled, sad, or similar feeling which you are experiencing, PianoStudent88, especially when playing it slowly.

When you get to the Trio, this same thing lifts. You have the more predictable things that we analyzed before, the movement is larger, and there are lots of major and seventh chords. In fact, I think that it is the contrast which creates an effect.

I would like to hear other performances to see what various performers have done with this piece, but it seems to be hard to find (I'll try some other key words).

I know that by this time the Minuet or Menuet was a "dance form" but it no longer functioned as a dance, so it would have lost some of its rhythmic qualities. But might other performers put more rhythm into it, or play it faster, or highlight particular notes? If so, then this would also give us aspects of the music to listen for and notice.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/08/1206:46 PM

Schubert, Op. 94/6, Allegretto

Originally Posted By: keystring

Richard, do I understand that this is part of a suite then? I think my theory book has a write up about Minuet form. All that we had so far is that this was a piece called Allegretto, with a performance and link to the score. A lot of us are in different stages of learning.

This is not a minuet and is not part of a suite.

It is structurally similar to one of the doubles in a Bach Suite, such as a minuet, but is no longer anything to do with a dance.

Bach and his contemporaries used a minuet as part of a suite. Mozart and Haydn adopted it as part of a sonata and Beethoven adapted it to form a Scherzo. The first part was not typically repeated. The second movement of his Moonlight sonata is an Allegretto of exactly this structure.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/08/1206:53 PM

Ok, I'm getting confused about the information being presented. First I read something about a minuet. Then, Richard, your previous post began with information about suites, and went on from there. I'm seeing information, but I can't seem to contextualize it.

Now here you have written that the Moonlight Sonata is "an Allegretto of the same structure". This makes me assume that there is such a thing as "an Allegretto" like there is such a thing as "a Sonata" or "A Minuet". I thought "allegretto" referred to a tempo and maybe mood or rhythm (allegro is fast-ish and lively; allegretto is either slower or faster than that, etc.).

I feel like I've walked into the middle of a lecture mid-term after not attending classes. Where might I find the information or context that I'm missing? (What do I google?)

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/08/1207:57 PM

Originally Posted By: keystring

Ok, I'm getting confused about the information being presented. First I read something about a minuet. Then, Richard, your previous post began with information about suites, and went on from there. I'm seeing information, but I can't seem to contextualize it.

Now here you have written that the Moonlight Sonata is "an Allegretto of the same structure". This makes me assume that there is such a thing as "an Allegretto" like there is such a thing as "a Sonata" or "A Minuet". I thought "allegretto" referred to a tempo and maybe mood or rhythm (allegro is fast-ish and lively; allegretto is either slower or faster than that, etc.).

I feel like I've walked into the middle of a lecture mid-term after not attending classes. Where might I find the information or context that I'm missing? (What do I google?)

PS88 mentioned this as being "Minuet and Trio form, with a da capo to the minuet".

The minuet began life in the suite. It is da capo ternary form.

Haydn and Mozart continued to include a minuet in their sonatas.

Beethoven did not use the minuet but introduced in its stead the Scherzo. It continued to have da capo ternary form but Beethoven frequently omitted the repeat of the first section.

This is now da capo ternary form but no longer anything to do with a minuet.

Schubert usually includes the repeat of all the sections.

There are many variations of the da capo form just as there were many variations of the Rondo.

At the end of the trio there is usually an instruction such "minuet da capo" or, as here, "Allegretto da capo" (go to the head of the Allegretto).

There are da capo forms, there are ternary forms and there are ternary da capo forms (or da capo ternary forms). This piece can be described by any of these terms. Because the tempo indication is allegretto the piece is an allegretto. This does not refer to its form.

A song would have song form. There are many song forms. They (the forms) don't all have names. Some of them are just the form of that particular song. It is a song form (a form of a song), one of many song forms.

This is an allegretto. It is a da capo. It is thus an allegretto da capo. There isn't one allegretto form, there are many. They don't have a set pattern or a named one.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/09/1207:29 AM

We started off learning what binary and ternary form is. You have mentioned these two, and we should all know what they are since they were covered.

We then went off on the topic of sonatas and sonata form. There was an immediate problem because sonatas consist of three movements, some of which are in sonata form, and some of which are in rondo form (or other forms?). We looked at sonatinas, since they are like simple sonatas, which makes learning to analyze them easier.

Now it seems that there is such a thing as a suite (not covered). This thread is called "sonata", but we seem to have jumped. The previous piece was a "song" in "song form" (of which apparently there are many), and the present piece is in a (undefined as of yet, form?) -- it has nothing to do with sonatas either, right? So we are now just freely exploring any kind of musical form? Going on a tangent which will come together later?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/09/1208:57 AM

We started off learning what binary and ternary form is. You have mentioned these two, and we should all know what they are since they were covered.

We started with these because the sonata principle, which defines form by key, used a very simple structural basis, binary form. Ternary form is also frequently used and has many variations but they all follow an ABA type of structure with variations in which bits are repeated and where the end comes, etc.

Originally Posted By: keystring

We then went off on the topic of sonatas and sonata form. There was an immediate problem because sonatas consist of three movements, some of which are in sonata form, and some of which are in rondo form (or other forms?). We looked at sonatinas, since they are like simple sonatas, which makes learning to analyze them easier.

In the classical period, approx 1770 - 1820 and fairly specifically to music produced by the Viennese masters the sonata took on a new meaning than the one applied by earlier musicians such as Bach, e.g. a sound piece as opposed to a sung piece. A classical sonata consists of one or more movements. One or more of these movements should be in classical sonata form, e.g. Tonic material, dominant material (or dominant substitute), modulation passage where the material is developed and finally the recapitulation in tonic.

The sonata was unique among the various forms that had developed thus far in music in that it's specific structure was defined by the key of the material being presented rather than the placement of repeat bars and other architectural means. It is the harmonic analysis of the structure that is covered by the term 'classical sonata analysis'.

The structure of a piece in da capo ternary form, for example, can be seen without being able to read much music and certainly without looking closely at the score.

Without looking at the notes we can see that the first two lines of Schubert's Allegretto being studied here are repeated, then the next six or so lines are repeated (and the last measure is marked 'Fine'. Then there is a Trio section (also two halves, each repeated) and concluding with the term 'Allegretto DC'.

There we have it! A1, A1, A2, A2, B1, B1, B2, B2, A1, A2. That's the structure. That's the form. Ternary, da capo. You can't do that with classical sonata form, you must look at the notes.

(B) Let the winds and waters be Mingled with our childish glee.(A2) Sing and float, sing and float In our little boat!

But without words to help us the composer has to repeat more frequently to make sure you get it.

Originally Posted By: keystring

Now it seems that there is such a thing as a suite (not covered).

The suite was the precursor to the sonata/symphony (a symphony is a sonata for orchestra and should also be covered by our current thread title) though you might have more difficulty playing it at sight (Liszt didn't but...).

A suite consists of more than one movement (a sonata can be just one). The form of all the pieces in a suite can be analysed by looking at the repeat bars etc. like our da capo Allegretto.

Originally Posted By: keystring

This thread is called "sonata", but we seem to have jumped. The previous piece was a "song" in "song form" (of which apparently there are many), and the present piece is in a (undefined as of yet, form?) -- it has nothing to do with sonatas either, right? So we are now just freely exploring any kind of musical form? Going on a tangent which will come together later?

Sonata form is defined by the key. All other forms are defined by architectural landmarks (except the concerto which might warrant its own thread - though it needn't).

Since a sonata may contain forms other than those in sonata form, those forms are also fair game but easier. The process is just simpler - look at the landmarks instead of the keys. The rest of the analysis is the same, thematic, proportional, tension/release, unity, harmonic language, etc, whether it's a four hour Opera or a two minute pop-song.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/09/1208:53 PM

Schubert Opus 94 Number 6

I am starting to appreciate this piece more. I played it through playing just the highest RH notes and the lowest LH notes. Now I can hear the melody, and a tiny thread of how the harmony enriches it. I can also see that I need two major skills to play this piece.

One skill is simply being able to get my hands and fingers to the succession of thick chords. This is not the thin filigree of the Anna Magdalena Bach Notebook, which takes a different kind of fingering skill.

The other skill is being able to voice it appropriately, so the melody can be heard clearly above the rest of the accompaniment in both LH and RH. This is not a skill I have practiced much: to voice louder just one note of a chord in a single hand (or to voice all the other notes in the chord softer).

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/10/1203:21 PM

Franz Schubert Opus 94 Number 6

So how are we all keeping up with our friend Franzie today?

Sorry to be out of the loop somewhat on this one over the last couple of days. I've been dealing with some irate and unreasonable client demands. More importantly though, working on Mendelsshohn, Chopin and brushing up some Christmas stuff.

This 17 century stride in the Chopin (OP 9, No 2) is brutal for my pace of reading. I think it will be taking longer then the Bach preludes. I know this one has been over done. But, I still want to learn it and perhaps attempt to get it into shape for the Feb recital. Sorry, yes I know, it is all about me and my little piano world.

Thanks Richard, for sharing the interesting insight of this classical period.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/10/1205:22 PM

One skill is simply being able to get my hands and fingers to the succession of thick chords...The other skill is being able to...voice louder just one note of a chord.

These are two very beneficial skills but don't put too high a stress on the ability to bring out notes as part of a chord. Thinking the melody will often do the job and the fingers will respond automatically. If they don't you can add exercises to improve the facility.

These thick harmonies are typical of the German Romantics. Mendelssohn abounds with it. I find it helpful when I set about such pieces to look at every chord change as an individual entity.

Someone once told me when I was struggling with difficult chords (on guitar) that it wasn't the chord but the speed at which you changed (Telecaster Ted Tomlin).

Practise changing chord as a mechanical operation, not done to any specific time but just done. When the change is accomplished without thinking do four beats of each chord, then two beats, then change chord on every beat. Do this holding each chord down for the full duration and staccato chords starting at mF and working towards FF and PP. When you can change quickly from chord X to chord Y you'll find you can change to chord Y from just about any chord or position. The trick, so to speak, is to change the hand shape in one go during the transition. Yes, that's obvious but having it said helps focus the mind on the task.

Later on, the central section of Chopin's Nocturne Op. 37/1 makes a good RH exercise requiring delicacy. The first 20 or so bars might make for a complementary LH exercise.

Only when you're comfortable with that need you worry about bringing out individual notes and thinking the note is often enough to get the job done.

Originally Posted By: Greener

the Chopin (OP 9, No 2) is brutal for my pace of reading...I know this one has been over done. But, I still want to learn it and perhaps attempt to get it into shape for the Feb recital.

As Sam said for his Op 28/15, we've not heard YOU play it, Jeff, but again, Op. 37/1 is equally lovable without as much difficulty (just) and hasn't yet been submitted. It's a huge improvement on his Op. 15/3. Although three months for either one is a bit of a stretch for recital standard (how many pieces do you normally learn at a time?).

Originally Posted By: Greener

Thanks Richard, for sharing the interesting insight of this classical period.

Any more home work for me? Or, how are we proceeding from here.

For the insight, you are welcome. For the homework, how about looking at the harmonies and the themes in this Allegretto?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/10/1206:57 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

How am I doing?

I get the gist of where you're going and I am no longer looking for sonata form in the pieces that are being presented here. We've moved on to a broad general exploration and it's an interesting one. There is also a mass of information to explore which is fantastic.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/10/1207:29 PM

Schubert, Op. 94/6, Allegretto

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Op. 37/1 is equally lovable without as much difficulty (just) and hasn't yet been submitted.

I took a listen to this one. Yes, it's nice. My priority though is still showier tunes, like the Nocturne. Plus, I'm already up to M5. However, there has been another piece that has been stuck in my head like a bad commercial, and I do not know what it is.

Can you please take a quick listen and excuse the corruption of what I believe is actually a lovely piece.

I am sure you will recognize it. I have just roughly tried to sketch out some of the melody. I think it is Chopin. If this is all there is to it, perhaps I will pass on this one too. But, have a feeling there is indeed more to it and is a piece I would also like to know.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/10/1207:57 PM

I was reading the bits about the actual playing of this music, and the skills to go with it. Richard wrote something wise about getting to know one chord at a time, and then practice the movement from one into the next, without worrying about time. I have also learned to get to know the last chord first, so that you are always moving into a familiar chord.

I'm always cautious about "how to play" because there are so many skills, and we can get it wrong both in reading or writing about it. Like, how do you actually "play" a chord, and how/when do you release it to go into the next chord? (I don't expect an answer and there shouldn't be one, since that is the point). Or, I learned a way to become able to voice the top note louder - you first play the non-melody notes quietly, then add the louder melody note so that you can have control of the two kinds of touches. Then you bring them closer together until they are simultaneously. But - will someone necessarily know how to physically make notes louder and softer? How about if the notes are held in the same hand such as here? That's why I'm not sure that these things can be (safely) conveyed over the Internet.

Playing in order to understand the music for analysis: I don't think it has to be complete or musical playing. If you play chord progressions, even in simplified form, you will get an idea about an aspect. If you play the melody alone - and if you sense a countermelody elsewhere - and play these rather than all the notes - you will get other aspects of it. What do other people think? I certainly cannot "sight read" the present piece near anything resembling music.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/11/1207:59 AM

You're absolutley right, keystring, about playing for analysis. If you follow the score while listening to advanced material like Beethoven sonatas and symphonies you will get to a point where you can just 'read' the score and audiate it (it worked for me).

When I'm analysing a symphony from the score I can 'hear' the music in my head but when it gets chromatic or the harmony more complex I have to separate out the instruments by playing them individually first, working out the notes for viola and trumpets (different clefs and different written pitches) and then I can 'hear' them better together.

I have the same approach to interpreting a new piece for piano. I follow the score, investigate unfamiliar pitches and intervals at the keyboard and 'imagine' from that how it's supposed to sound and let this gradually replace performances I might have heard. I'm at that very stage with my Mendelssohn piece(s) right now. Getting the my interpretation into my head before I start working at the piano.

For me analysis comes first, then understanding, then, finally, playing. Gone are the days when I would play first, analyse later and finally understand because by then all the bad habits are ingrained and are often difficult to change e.g. thoughtless heavy handedness where a light touch is better or pressing the keys where they need to be stroked.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/11/1209:24 AM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Waltz in A-flat, Op 69, No. 1, "L'Adieu"

Thanks, Richard. This is a terrific piece. I like it a lot. It has also been done a few times in the recitals as I have found, but not nearly as much as the Nocturne. At any rate, it is on my list now and will see if I can tackle any quicker then the Nocturne.

"How many pieces do you normally learn at a time?" I think 3 is a good pace for me, but they will be at different levels. Up until a couple of years ago, I had not learned anything new in years. Then had a teacher for a bit and started trying to get more material. But it was just lead sheets with chords and not so tough. Even so, it was always one at a time.

Things have changed since joining PW and particularly these study threads. Essentially I have shifted into high gear and want to learn more and read better. So, 3 is good.

I still want to get back to the Moonlight Sonata, but Chopin is going to be keeping me busy for awhile now.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/11/1201:38 PM

Sorry for this "not related to this thread" post, but just a quick question if I may.

I am trying to follow your recent advice, Richard of analyzing and understanding the score a bit, before diving into it.

I downloaded the score from IMSLP music library and a few things are not lining up with the performance you posted. I won't go into them all, but a couple of examples are:

1.) The performance does not take the repeat on the second page. I can live with that. 2.) I don't get what all these tiny 16th notes with the slash through them are about. It is more then just this note being played in this performance. I would need to try and hear and see if I can figure out what is actually being played in all these instances (there are several.)3.) In the measure (5 measures before repeat on 2nd page,) the performance posted does not account for all these notes.

Anyway, I am sure things will become clearer as I begin to digest this, but any insight would be appreciated. I can post a link to the PDF I downloaded if it helps.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/11/1203:05 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

You're absolutley right, keystring, about playing for analysis. If you follow the score while listening to advanced material like Beethoven sonatas and symphonies you will get to a point where you can just 'read' the score and audiate it (it worked for me).

Different people will have different abilities. Some come with training and some are unique to a person's makeup. I would hate someone to become frustrated or feel inadequate if they take that route, and then can't audiate. In fact, I audiated for years to the point where it caused confusion in the lessons I had in another instrument, because we didn't figure out that I could not read music as an instrumentalist does. I could also only audiate in certain musical contexts. What I cannot do yet very well is to listen to recordings while following the score, because I never listened to recordings. My ability to hear details in performed pieces is at a primitive stage through lack of experience.

Quote:

I have the same approach to interpreting a new piece for piano. I follow the score, investigate unfamiliar pitches and intervals at the keyboard and 'imagine' from that how it's supposed to sound and let this gradually replace performances I might have heard. I'm at that very stage with my Mendelssohn piece(s) right now. Getting the my interpretation into my head before I start working at the piano.

I think I do similar, with listening to performances being something very new to me. My HUGE handicap is that I am almost at the very beginning of any physical technique including needing to weed out self-taught habits galore. Most of what is stopping me is physical. What I do is get an overall picture of the piece, then analysis for some of the details which gives substance to that picture and may change it. Then I think of interpretation, explore a bit, and then after that I listen to what performers have done. The performances don't seem to mean much before that, unless I were aiming for blind imitation (which I don't do very well).

Quote:

For me analysis comes first, then understanding, then, finally, playing. Gone are the days when I would play first, analyse later and finally understand because by then all the bad habits are ingrained and are often difficult to change e.g. thoughtless heavy handedness where a light touch is better or pressing the keys where they need to be stroked.

I'm a couple of stages behind you. I first have to get that light touch or stroke, as well as removing any obstacles preventing them from happening. What is universally true is the need to go at it in stages, intelligently.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/13/1201:43 PM

Schubert Opus 94 Number 6

Melodic form

I haven't had time with this piece at the piano since I last posted, but examining the score and remembering bits of how it sounded, I do have some ideas.

In the Allegretto (the Trio is different): A characteristic gesture is the sigh, usually downwards (e.g. mm.1-2) but sometimes upwards (e.g. mm.7-8). Another repeated gesture is a descending scale, sometimes with chromatics, e.g. mm.12-16, mm.22-24, mm.73-77, and other places). There is a repeated rhythmic pattern, first seen at the very beginning in the pickup and mm.1-2: quarter note, dotted half note, sigh to quarter note.

The melody is fairly regular in 8 bar units to start: two sighs, a two measure melodic bit, and a closing sigh. This changes for the pattern starting in m.24. It starts with two sighs, and then expands its melodic bit from 2 to 10 measures (mm.29-38).

Starting at m.40, the pattern compresses: sighs separated by two measures of melody; and then at m.55 just consecutive sighs, through m.65. Mm.65-77 complete the Allegretto with a repeated ascending and descending figure.

The Trio changes flavour (and key) to a more straight-forward melody, that proceeds in pairs of 4 measure units, except that Schubert slips in an extra 2 measures at mm.102-103.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/13/1203:29 PM

Schubert Opus 94 Number 6

Harmonic form

Very puzzling, to start with. We're no longer in the world of the classical sonatinas of Clementi. There, the keys are the tonic or closely related keys (i.e., nearby on the circle of fifths, or parallel major and minor). There, the chords are overwhelmingly I and V, with admixtures of ii, V7, vii°7, and an occasional vi and even rarer iii, all proceeding in circle-of-fifths progressions.

Here, the keys are Ab major, E major (!), and Db major -- at least gauging by the key signatures. I haven't examined the piece closely enough to know if other keys are passed through. The first three chords are Ab, Dbmaj7, Bbm7. In roman numberals: I, IVmaj7, IIm7. These are not the typical opening chords of a Clementi sonatina, but immediately take us into a different harmonic world.

Not all landmarks have been abandoned; the first 8 measure phrase cadences on Eb and the second 8 measure phrase cadences on Ab, so the familiar V and I cadences are in place. But in between strange things are happening.

That's as much as I've worked out so far. I'm torn between doing a chord-by-chord harmonic analysis (and immediately uncovering all the wierd things) vs. looking at the cadences and key changes to get an overview of the skeleton, before looking at the details.

As far as looking at the chords, Schubert seems to frequently anticipate the following chord as much as a full measure ahead (I'll give examples in a later post). So identifying the harmony will be more complex than simply ticking off notes vertically.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/14/1209:58 AM

Schubert Opus 94 Number 6

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

how about looking at the harmonies and the themes in this Allegretto?

The themes appear very straight forward to me. Perhaps that is not a good sign though. I like Franz, he puts all the key changes in the key signature (or at least most) and marks the themes with a section break (sort of.)

Theme 1: M1 - M16Theme 2: M17 - M39 There is an interesting variation that starts at M33, but I think it is still all within this same theme. Theme 3: Begins at M39, this is a gorgeous key change and the nicest section of the whole piece, IMO. The return to Theme 1 at the end of 53 is also very nice, and sounds like quickly changing to minor in this short recap before ...

... lastly, there is a tag M66-M77. It is a big tag, but reluctant to call this another theme, as it is reminiscent of what has led to this point, but not an exact replica.

The trio is then quite standalone to all of the above and is one theme x 3.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/14/1204:42 PM

I mentioned looking at them, though identification will do. My intent was that you think about them but summarise your thoughts for us.

You've mentioned key changes but haven't listed either chords or keys yet. In M16 when he starts the second theme he adds two flats, Fb and Cb. This implies Gb major but the only G in that 12 measures before the key sig. change is G natural (M24)in a chord of Eb major.

Remember that E is enharmonic F flat (seven flats), one more click left on the circle of fifths from Gb and requiring Bbb. This is three clicks left of our tonic and is the equivalent of moving from minor to relative major.

Originally Posted By: PianoStudent88

That's as much as I've worked out so far. I'm torn between doing a chord-by-chord harmonic analysis (and immediately uncovering all the wierd things) vs. looking at the cadences and key changes to get an overview of the skeleton, before looking at the details.

As far as looking at the chords, Schubert seems to frequently anticipate the following chord as much as a full measure ahead (I'll give examples in a later post). So identifying the harmony will be more complex than simply ticking off notes vertically.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/14/1205:44 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

You've mentioned key changes but haven't listed either chords or keys yet. In M16 when he starts the second theme he adds two flats, Fb and Cb. This implies Gb major but the only G in that 12 measures before the key sig. change is G natural (M24)in a chord of Eb major.

Yes, I am a bit behind on my homework I am afraid. What about Ab minor for this section? I did mention this key earlier as well but not for this section. But, as no one payed notice, I lost confidence and did not bring it up again. But, I like it here too.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/14/1206:28 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/21/1209:37 AM

This Artur fellow, is driving me a bit nutty. He is up to all kinds of tricks and some are not so easy to figure out exactly what he's doing (the LH in the con anima.)

Anyway, will play it by wrote for now (pleased I have all the themes figured out and can make it all the way through) and see if I can use some of his variations as it comes more smoothly. That is, if I can figure them out.

So, back in the saddle again or at least soon with continuing along here with Franz. But afraid to say I am quite behind, so hope no one is waiting on me for anything.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/21/1207:38 PM

I expect we've all enjoyed a break from analysis while we listen to the recitalists. We've been going solidly, I think, since we started in August.

OK, got it. Will hang loose.

True enough, we have been fairly rock steady since mid-August so this break for the recitalists is a nice change up. Mission accomplished though ... not letting this forum subject slip too far out of mind.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/27/1209:19 AM

Schubert, Op. 94/6, Allegretto

While our friends are recovering from celebrating their annual festivities I was thinking about performance notes for this piece (for my own benefit) and my thoughts came to a head yesterday when I responded to a thread on dynamic independence in the hands and another on scale practise.

There are often occasions when one hand plays at a different dynamic level than the other but when that isn't the case should all the notes be played at the same level?

This is indeed how we should play our scales but this is most definitely not how we should play our music.

I'm reminded of the story of a little girl playing monotonously and, when asked asked why she was not applying expression, responded that her teacher said "expression costs extra".

And I've often seen it noted in threads here on PW that the expression is added after pieces are learnt. This is not an ideal way of approaching a piece.

Getting the expression in at the outset puts the correct muscular actions into effect and whether you consciously memorise your pieces or not you do use muscle memory to play faster than and at a level above that of sight reading.

Let's take a simple example first, Chopin's Nocturne in Eb, Op. 9 No. 2. The left hand is not playing the accompaniment evenly. The first note of each group of three is a tiny bit above the two following chords, the third bass note slightly above the second and fourth and the first one above the third. The melody line in RH is above all of these but is it at the same level? No, it most definitely is not. Not only does it share the implicit metrical accents it is also saying something. We don't speak in a monotone (Stephen Hawking and Daleks excepted) so we certainly shouldn't sing in one.

So how do we phrase the line?

Clearly it must be saying something. We can be trite and imagine the accompaniment being played on the piano and the melody played on a violin above it but a violin is no more expressive than the piano itself.

What is the music saying? If you add a lyric it's so much easier to add better phrasing but first we must find out what that phrasing is. The line has to have the correct scansion to do the job properly.

If, for the nocturne, you came up with these two first lines:

"If THE baby's cryingAnd THE radio is on TOO loud for it"

it doesn't scan. The number of syllables is right but the accents are all wrong. We don't normally emphasise "the" in speech and the second word of each line should be getting an accent here.

We need to change it to:"If BAby is cryingAnd IF the radio is ON too loudly"

it fits better.

What we need to do now is come up with a better sentiment.

"Don't leave me, my darlingMy life would be an empty void without you"

It's getting better (but guess why I'm not on Broadway! ).

But it doesn't have to be a great lyric! It has to scan correctly and it has to match the sentiment of what the music is trying to say and, most important of all, it has to help you shape the phrasing to bring out the sentiment.

It's a song line not a monotone.

Now, getting back to the Schubert, we have a similar sentiment here in the first two lines.

"Don't leave me, my darlingWhat have I done to make you HATE meI love you, <screams> I LOVE YOU <whimpers> And I could not live without you"

(Don't worry, I'm sticking to my day job)

But do you get the point?

The music has to SAY something (why else would those particular dynamic markings be there in these two lines?). It doesn't need a lyric, though I find it helps when the rhythm isn't straightforward, but it needs a sentiment and a way to express it and you need to get that in before you start practising it with a monotone. Build the expression into your muscle memory from the outset. The dynamics are very strongly marked in this piece. It would be too long without them so make sure to bring them out if and when you play this piece.

And whenever you play two adjacent notes at the same dynamic level, have a jolly good reason for it!

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/27/1210:16 AM

Very illuminating, Richard. I've been mulling over this piece, particularly the Trio (which seemed more approachable than the Allegretto) and have a bunch of ideas, but having a hard time getting them down in writing. Of course starting with the Trio leaves out the ability to say anything yet about how the Trio either contrasts with or is consistent with the Allegretto, but c'est la vie.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/27/1210:25 AM

Thinking about practicing with expression from the start: I think it's good to be able to play with expression, and to practice with expression rather than spend any long amount of time getting too used to playing in a monotone. But my goal with a piece is not just to be able to play it with the specified expression, but to be able to practice it in different ways, to play with the expression, sometimes subtly, sometimes changing it up completely, sometimes for ideas about performance, sometimes for practice techniques of shaking out of a rut.

For example I've been practicing Satie's Gymnopedie No. 3 for the Themed Recital, and experimenting with different kinds of expression, different levels of rubato, different kinds of balance between the three lines; and occasionally just playing the whole thing REALLY LOUD, which then helps when I go back to the prevailing marked "piano" dynamic in giving me a firmer touch.

Also sometimes in practicing/playing a piece I start to hear new things in it, which then affect the expression I want to use.

So I'm a bit leary of the idea of being able to decide on a fixed expression from the very beginning, and then practicing it with only that expression, as if there's only one way to play a piece.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/27/1210:38 AM

Ah, no! You don't play with just that expression. You think about it from the beginning, your playing reflects that thinking. You can change it in a whim. But it's difficult to START thinking about it when you can already play it without thinking about it. Does that make sense?

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/27/1210:42 AM

And I've often seen it noted in threads here on PW that the expression is added after pieces are learnt. This is not an ideal way of approaching a piece.

Getting the expression in at the outset puts the correct muscular actions into effect and whether you consciously memorise your pieces or not you do use muscle memory to play faster than and at a level above that of sight reading.

Some excellent insight here and agree whole heartily.

My Dad (when reminiscing with his Rye and Milk) would say ... many people will claim there are 3 elements to music ... Melody, Harmony and Rhythm. The vital, and often missing 4th component though, is expression.

As you know, I am working on the Chopin Waltz. Similar to the Nocturne, a piece like this will really fall flat with out expression. It is really a poster piece for exemplifying how much expression can change the entire dynamics of the piece. Case and point are the two very different performances of this waltz, posted previously.

I was kind of at a loss of what I was really supposed to do on thinking about and summarizing themes for this piece (jumping back to Schubert now.) But have better ideas now. I'm still climbing out from under a pile of work related stuff, but hope to get back sonatizing soon.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/27/1211:39 AM

Responding to Richard's ideas about how to go about playing expressively (practicing).

First off, there will be different approaches, and in this medium it is not good to insist that any given approach is right, with others being wrong. The short answer is "It depends". 1. A teacher may have an overall plan that spans a couple of years. If a student decides what he is being taught is "wrong" he may put a spanner in the works of this overall picture. 2. Students and musicians in general are individuals, with their particular strengths and weaknesses, and if students, they are at whatever stage they are at. What works at one stage may not work at another, or for another student.

I'll send off this preamble before continuing, so it doesn't become one long post.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/27/1212:27 PM

(continued)For working on a piece so that it becomes expressive:

A first factor to keep in mind is that at least some of us are still learning how to use our bodies in the sense of technique. This is important. Sometimes something we hear in our head will also get us to use the right motions. When you are angry and your voice is loud and harsh, sad and your voice is quiet a low pitched, you are not consciously directing body to produce these sounds - the emotion itself makes you do the right thing. This is one way we can end up playing expressively, IF this happens the right way.

Often, however, this does not happen. When I was self-taught, my staccato sounded convincing, but I tensed my forearm and it prevented me from playing fast. I was fingery and produced loud through force force in a tense hand, instead of allowing a flow of motion with a flexible wrist. Therefore we may need to learn new physical motions deliberately, and we need to get coordination into our bodies. It's the same process as a baby trying to eat a biscuit and poking his forehead with it because he misses his mouth. It takes time and practice.

2. Principal 2: We can only concentrate on one new thing at a time. Therefore, if I am learning to physically produce louder sounds by keeping flow in my arms with a flexible wrist (or whatever), instead of tensing my body and using force --- I cannot also be trying to get the right notes at the right time when they are unfamiliar. So my own strategy is to first get the notes with good fingering, chunking, with no thought to expressiveness, and often not much consideration to timing, which for me is a second step. Having this solid then liberates me to put all my concentration on the physical motions that I want to have in order to produce the dynamics that I want to have, without hurting myself. This is because of where I am at.

I will add that I have learned some effective practice techniques and approaches, which means I don't spend much time on the first step. Therefore a habit of playing mechanically does not become entrenched (your concern, Richard). If at a future time the habits I want are in my body, so that I imagine "louder" and my body does the right thing, then my practicing approach will be different.

If you were taught to play mechanically, and you were also taught how to move efficiently, then you may need an approach that is the opposite of what I need. That was my point in my earlier post.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/27/1205:07 PM

Yes, I should be more aware of other peoples levels and difficulties.

My perspective is that the further along the path one is to being fluent with a piece the harder it is to stop and pay attention to every note. But each phrase must have a melodic line and a volume line and each note has a starting point, a velocity, and a discrete finishing point, whether it's a point in time or in relation to the next note and in some pieces this last is critical e.g. in a Bach fugue or where the pedal is not being used.

It's hard to focus enough attention to these details when the whole phrase is already in the fingers. It takes several times longer to get a piece performance ready if it's left that long but would add barely a few minutes to the overall learning time if considered from the outset when you're spending time on each note anyway.

It's a bit like memorising a piece. Memorising takes slow repetitions of short phrases or part phrases. Exactly the same process as accurate finger memory. So why not do the two things together? Once you can play the piece fluently from the score it is drudgery to repeat it slowly in short units.

Trying to memorise a piece a line or two at time seems to take an age to sink in and yet is forgotten again in the blink of an eye.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/29/1212:58 PM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

My perspective is that the further along the path one is to being fluent with a piece the harder it is to stop and pay attention to every note.

Finally going back to Beethoven Moonlight Sonata (1st movement,) and now that I am reading the score there are a few more problems then I thought. The work has been engrained in my memory, incorrectly, for years. Trying to fix these issues now is not insurmountable, but is certainly more difficult then I thought it was going to be.

Will take a listen to Schubert now and get back on the beam. I'm totally stressed by work at the moment and need to step away from it. I'm thankful though to have this forum and a piano directly behind me, for a much needed escape.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/29/1201:12 PM

Again we're running into the fact that there are different ways of doing things. Ever since I discovered that I've been going hog wild finding them, because there may be something better than what I know.

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

My perspective is that the further along the path one is to being fluent with a piece the harder it is to stop and pay attention to every note.

It does not necessarily have to be every note. It can be a group of notes, a specific movement in order to not make it awkward. In chunking you work on what is difficult, and spend little time on what comes easy for the first stage. This is part of what I've learned.

Quote:

But each phrase must have a melodic line and a volume line and each note has a starting point, a velocity, and a discrete finishing point, whether it's a point in time or in relation to the next note and in some pieces this last is critical e.g. in a Bach fugue or where the pedal is not being used.

Among others. To my surprise, focusing on each of these individually seems to make it come together faster than focusing on all of them at the same time. It's not what I expected or did in the past.

Quote:

It's hard to focus enough attention to these details when the whole phrase is already in the fingers. It takes several times longer to get a piece performance ready if it's left that long

That is assuming that the first stage takes a long time. What if it doesn't?

Quote:

but would add barely a few minutes to the overall learning time if considered from the outset when you're spending time on each note anyway.

That is what I found was not true for me. Since I cannot focus on more than one new thing at a time, all of it stays at a given level, and even weeks later that level doesn't improve much. If I work on one layer at a time, then in the same number of weeks it sounds better and improves steadily. Again, it may be depend on the person playing, their level, and even the nature of the piece. I'm working on a piece now where I'm going backward from how I usually work.

Quote:

Memorising takes slow repetitions of short phrases or part phrases.

That is one approach to memorizing music. Depending on the piece, you may also be aware of patterns. I think it also depends on how you are relating to the music. I tend to hear it in my head as if it's unfolding. If you have a simple ternary piece then you're almost predicting that the melody will repeat in the dominant or relative major key and maybe predicting the chord progressions as well.

Quote:

Once you can play the piece fluently from the score it is drudgery to repeat it slowly in short units.

I find it fascinating - like a treasure hunt - to keep seeing different sides of the music. It's like getting a new pet canary. What shades of feathers does it have? How does it fly? How does it chirp? What is its song like? When does it like to sing? How about its personality? I see the different aspects of a piece in this way.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/29/1205:34 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/29/1205:38 PM

I am mulling over your post on memorising and learning methodology, keystring. I'll come back to it when I've had more thinking time but many of the differences I suspect are due to differences in the system as a whole and the psychology/attitude to learning rather than the individual points.

Much of it also may be affected by time.

I always used to learn HS before even considering HT when approaching a piece for the first time. Much of it was to do with my sight-reading ability (or lack thereof) but shortly after joining this wonderful forum I discussed the point here and following interaction with Brian Lucas and CarlosCC, among others, I experimented both with sight reading and starting HT.

In my short time here my sight-reading has blossomed like never before and, especially since starting these analysis threads, I find myself sight-reading grade six and seven material without major upsets. I still work most passages HS as well as HT because I find it helps to memorise the material better in cognisant memory whereas memorising with only HT practise develops finger memory better but cognisant memory hardly at all and finger memory is unreliable in performance and unhelpful working away from the piano.

So I still memorise HS before HT but they're both done at the one time (not simultaneously, obviously, but RH, LH, HT, RH, LH, HT etc.). It's a big change in system but outwardly only in the time factor.

My eldest is in his final school year before university and I've been helping him a little with his maths. In algebra he gets the method right but slips up with his signs. He sees the number as important and the sign as trivial and I've been trying to make him see the sign as an integral part of the number. (Incidentally, just the way I see velocity as much a part of the note as it's pitch.) Clearly he hasn't experienced debt yet; he knows the amount but doesn't know if he owes or is owed!

You seem to be having a similar problem. It's clear you're understanding the harmony and those following without attempting to work the stuff out themselves won't be inconvenienced but those checking their findings with yours might get confused.

Double check M21-25 for mode and number. M22 may be another matter entirely but I'll wait first.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/30/1209:52 AM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Schubert, Op. 94/6, AllegrettoMy eldest is in his final school year before university and I've been helping him a little with his maths. In algebra he gets the method right but slips up with his signs.

I could see where this was leading immediately, and it wasn't sounding good for me .

Fixed now. But I got rid of the Fbmaj7/Db which I thought was so cool. Perhaps the names aren't as cool now, but the chords are still very nice.

Hopefully this is better but I don't think completely correct yet. I'm not sure what to do about beat 2 in M22 and now need to run for a bit.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/30/1212:08 PM

Schubert, Op. 94/6, Allegretto

Originally Posted By: Greener

OK, I'll take my scolding now.

<sharpens knife>

22. From the Db m6 in M21, Db moves to Bb in the bass and Eb in the melody. Effectively, the notes are Bb-Fb-Ab-Eb. I'd rather not give this chord a name, especially not in polite society, but I'd rather think of it as a continuation of a Db chord without the root but with a flat 3rd, 5th, 6th and 9th than a move to a Bb chord with a dim 5th, flat 7th and a 4th. It still sounds cool though!

We move on the second beat to Cb-Ab-Bb-Fb or Fb add 11 if I HAD to give it a name. The third beat is Bb dim that you had before. Perhaps I should mention the ones I agree with as well as those that raise suspicions.

The whole bar closes the bass progression from Bb to Eb in M24 and the melodic progression from Eb down to G.

23. I would want to see G natural before I suspected Ab minor and that doesn't appear before M34.

24/5 Fb Ab Cb = Fb major. D nat is a sharped sixth but is enharmonically Ebb thus Fb 7. E7/Fb doesn't sit right with me but you've fixed that now. I'm not sure what you had there before.

26-29. Yes, it's just an enharmonic change from Fb to E for notational convenience not a key change.

32 F#m/B reads uncomfortably as B isn't in F# min. B is the added 11th. Purely a notational awkwardness. The kind that makes me consider the appropriateness of this slash notation. Personally I'm not marking it in my scores as I can see from the music what the bass is and I'm not going to playing this like a fake book. For me F#m add 11 works better and I can see immediately that the 11th is in the bass. The /B makes me think there's a misprint somewhere.

Don't get hung up on this stuff, Jeff. Look how far you've come in a few scant months! Not just in writing out the chords names, and the fairly flawless ease with which your managing regular chords, but your thinking process too looking at minor key transitions (albeit erroneous in this particular instance) and the thinking behind dim. or rootless 7b9 debate you were pondering.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/30/1201:39 PM

Schubert, Op. 94/6, AllegrettoPerhaps I should mention the ones I agree with as well as those that raise suspicions.

Well, I do tend to over think things sometimes, so this might help. In this case, I was just getting sloppy.

"23. I would want to see G natural before I suspected Ab minor and that doesn't appear before M34."

I've changed now to Cb/Eb

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

Don't get hung up on this stuff ...

Thanks, Richard. I quite enjoy it as you may have presumed by now. But, you are right that I need to move along from this section. I have been looking at it too long now and starting to make silly mistakes. Would you mind taking one last quick gander and correct me of anything so I can update for the flock?

I will continue with chords up to the trio. This may take a bit of more time now though. Having fun with it and want to get them noted at least this far.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 11/30/1202:06 PM

On the proviso that M22 is being worked on that looks fine, Jeff.

List out the notes for each chord (where you're having difficulty) and give each note a number based on the possible roots. Then choose the one with the best selection of uneven numbers in the first octave. Try to be aware of enharmonics such as the D nat/Ebb in the Fb7 above. If it's still not plain sailing just list all the notes with the bass as the root and add a question mark!

Composers add notes, they may not be concerned about fake books, theory or naming conventions.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 12/01/1207:37 AM

Originally Posted By: zrtf90

On the proviso that M22 is being worked on that looks fine, Jeff.

OK, any better with the final selection for M22 now? This is the best I could come up with (I tried to follow direction in your first note re; this set of chord analysis) and my list has reached the edit maximum.

22) Dbm6/Bb, Fb add 11, Bbdim

I'm off to London (Ontario - my home town) today for a Birthday party, and can not check in again until tomorrow, but would like to fix this section before moving along. These chords, work for me and I suppose the middle one could be noted as being over Cb and the Diminished over Db.

Question on notation: When we have a tie as in M21-M22 the notes in the tie often change (example M17-M18). In this case though Fb is in M21 and is tied to M22. The flat sign though is not denoted in M22 and would otherwise be natural now based on the key signature. I believe it stays flat and they would have written natural if they wanted it. I'm a bit confused as sometimes the notes in a tie change, so shouldn't they have written in the flat again? Or, they don't need to do this, because of the tie?

This would throw another wrench of course, into my chord selection if I have the notes wrong in M22. But, I believe you have already confirmed the correct notes for M22, and indeed Fb. Nevertheless, I am still a bit confused on how it is notated.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 12/01/1209:41 AM

I am loath to give a name to the first chord in M22 but if you're going to call it Db without a Db in the chord you might mention in parentheses that it's rootless. If it is Db the other notes are 3, 5, 7 and 13 (can't be 6th if 7th is present) so that makes it a rootless Db13.

So we're both Londoners born half a world apart! Enjoy the birthday bash.

Yes indeed (Londoners - I was born their but raised in Lambeth Ontario and I know England has one of those too) and closer then it otherwise appear. All the GP's are from England and Whiffy was born in Erith between Woolwich and Dartford. Her Mom still resides in Whistable.

Party though was for Macie who was adopted from Wuhan China in 2004 (10 years old now, Yippee.) It's a long story ... my life is complex .

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 12/02/1212:44 PM

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 12/03/1209:58 AM

I'm trying to learn (actually play) this thing as fast as I'm spewing out the chords. Seeing as it is not actually a key change at M29, but rather a convenience of notation, I must say it certainly isn't very convenient for me. It's only a few bars I wish they just stayed there. Oh well, I guess they wanted to challenge my reading comprehension.

Re: Classical Sonata Analysis - 12/03/1210:14 AM

Schubert Op. 94 No. 6

I gave this piece a listen again, and I just cannot find any interest in it to listen to it, although there is technical interest as far as analyzing it. Do you (Greener, Richard, keystring) like this piece, and if so, why?